This Issue of the Stalking Report is by psychology
of stalking expert, Dr. Joe Davis.
The article focuses on the topic of Stalking in the
Workplace … Part-II
Falsely Alleged
Victimization Syndrome (FAVS): Victimization as Secondary Gain
“To be or not to be, that
is the question” (William Shakespeare, from the play HAMLET, Act-III).
Many
stalking cases I have worked or consulted on are quite complex, demanding and
time consuming. Stalking cases often place high cognitive, intellectual and
emotional demands on all personnel involved. The type of case I will briefly
discuss here is of no exception. This type of case is referred to as FAVS.
Have
you heard of FAVS or Falsely Alleged Victimization Syndrome? Let me discuss a
new phenomenon we are seeing that involves a “type of imagined unwanted
pursuit” that on the surface level appears to have all the merit and
foundation of any stalker case but often reveals a psychological unveiling of
twisted, distorted and embellished confabulations or fabrications that is just
as surprising to many agencies as it is to many of the people personally
involved with the FAVS subject. To the new or untrained professional involved
in a stalker-victim investigation, the process that this type of subject can
place the agency or investigator in can be overwhelming often leading the
aforementioned on a “wild goose chase”.
Did
you know that being in the helping profession could place those who work
with victims of stalking and related cases in a one-sided impressionable bias
or myopic role; that is, regardless of the circumstances or situation, we truly
want to believe and help any victim involved in a crime. However, in some
very rare cases, the incident of stalking may NOT exist and is only imagined
or feigned by the subject.
In
these cases, the alleged victim and subject is quite convincing and convincible
to those who take their statement. A closer look at many of these cases has
told me that such situations reveal some motive involving a secondary gain,
i.e., attention, sympathy, extended services, mental health support, financial
support or gain, etc. Instances of “believed stalking” are referred to as
“Falsely Alleged Victimization Syndrome” or FAVS. Thankfully, FAVS is rare.
However, to the untrained investigator or interviewer, similar in scope to Munchausen’s
Syndrome by Proxy (MSBP), FAVS can have a very perplexing, yet significant
time consuming impact and drain on any agency’s services and their human
resources.
When
working with the “stalking victim”, if you suspect a possible FAVS case, know
what elements to look for, i.e., inconsistency in their statements, successive
or subsequent interviews regarding the victim’s stories seem to worsen, stories
lack corroborating support and evidence, dates of recall for events lack
consistency or credibility, etc. Note: many FAVS cases take on an appearance of
a theatrical quality.
Page 2, FAVS
Almost
surreal-like, many FAVS impressionists alleging stalking victimization
emotionally choreograph, psychologically dramatize or manufacture or fabricate
information to tell the investigator or interviewer what he or she wants to
hear in that interview. Oftentimes, the interviewer or investigator as a follow
up measure to the interview session will literally find that the evidentiary
trial of clues or events offered by the FAVS subject either has no reliable and
valid connecting element, beginning or ending points. Note: demand
characteristics (Orne et al.) are often attributed to the authority figure
(interviewer) doing the interviewing from the FAVS person.
When
interviewing a potential FAVS case, it is imperative that you design your
interview questions and queries beforehand around the dates, times, places and
events regarding stalking-stalker conduct as revealed by the subject. Remember,
stalking is a form of unwanted pursuit that involves a repeated following with some form of harassment of
another person where a “credible threat” is often involved suggesting an intent
(explicit, implied or other) to place that person in reasonable fear for his or
her safety”. In other words, stalking is a “repeated pattern and course of
harassing conduct intended to frighten, intimidate or terrorize a targeted
victim”. Finally, make careful observations (later transfer these observations to
recorded notes, etc) as to subject’s mental status (mood, affect, hygiene, dress,
orientation, perceptions, pre-occupations, mannerisms, rate of speech, thought
content, etc), eye contact, body language or other non-verbal behavior physical
reactions around the aforementioned disclosures. Furthermore, statement
analysis as well as voice-stress analysis can also be key interview examining
points when suspecting a FAVS case.
Usually,
since the many FAVS subjects are unusually cooperative (often appearing to go
out of their way to help the investigator or interviewer), see if you can
secure consent to audio and video the initial as well any subsequent
interviews. Doing so insures a “second
look” at the subject as to the aforementioned verbal, non-verbal and mental
state cues that are brought to the interview process.
Remember,
many cases of stalking that we want to place on our “wish list” to be moved to
the “case closed” file never actually make that category. As colleague, Steve
Albrecht, DBA, CPP, PHR, a security expert puts it, “stalking cases are
never case closed, only case inactive”. Therefore, stalking cases can
remain open almost indefinitely.
Stalkers
do get out of jail and do move on. However, stalkers can move on to find new
victims. And there are a number of sufficiently documented cases where stalkers
even re-attach to their previous victims. The case of Arthur Jackson is one
such case. Jackson, (Cal. People v. Jackson) not limited by incarceration and
confinement, found a way to continued to terrorize and threaten by
correspondence actress Teresa Saldana, a crime victim of his relentless
stalking pursuit, even from prison.
For more information on
FAVS, training, education, organizational workplace policy, corporate or agency
program development or for a confidential consultation regarding stalking,
workplace violence, threat-risk assessment or threat management, contact the
author, Dr. Joseph A. Davis at his office at 858-268-3610 in San Diego.
All research references
and citations are available upon request.
Ó 2002 Joseph Davis, Ph.D., LL.D., All rights are reserved by the author.