# The Aftermath: Woman Defends Against Stalker **URL:** \ **Category:** True Stories\ **Created:** [April 19, 2024, 3:00pm UTC](https://community.usconcealedcarry.com/t/the-aftermath-woman-defends-against-stalker/102471 "2024-04-19T15:00:43Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 4\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![James\_L3](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/bcef8e/32.png) [@James\_L3](https://community.usconcealedcarry.com/u/James_L3)\ **Post date:** [May 6, 2024, 7:02pm UTC](https://community.usconcealedcarry.com/t/the-aftermath-woman-defends-against-stalker/102471/21 "2024-05-06T19:02:09Z")
I agree; the article was short on detail. Was she blocked in? Did she think it required urgent action or wouldn’t have time to call for help? Had she had a past experience where calling for help didn’t work? There are way too many variables for any of us to truly assess why she needed to take matters into her own hands. I can’t judge her actions not knowing all the information, and accept that she felt her life was in danger until facts prove otherwise. ---
**Author:** ![David12](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/ed655f/32.png) [@David12](https://community.usconcealedcarry.com/u/David12)\ **Post date:** [May 6, 2024, 7:08pm UTC](https://community.usconcealedcarry.com/t/the-aftermath-woman-defends-against-stalker/102471/22 "2024-05-06T19:08:02Z")
The suggestion if calling or going the police is not a bad thought. However, the article does not state when the woman became aware of her ex’s presence. It could be she only became aware of the ex’s presence after he approached her car. Lacking more specifics I can only state “if you do bad things, you may well have unwanted things happen to you”. ---
**Author:** ![BeanCounter](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/flex015/user_avatar/community.usconcealedcarry.com/beancounter/32/173526_2.png) [@BeanCounter](https://community.usconcealedcarry.com/u/BeanCounter)\ **Post date:** [May 6, 2024, 7:58pm UTC](https://community.usconcealedcarry.com/t/the-aftermath-woman-defends-against-stalker/102471/23 "2024-05-06T19:58:43Z")
Sometimes, I appreciate discussions like this where details are limited. It makes me think outside the box. Makes me consider the unpredictable. ---
**Author:** ![Glock45NRA](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/flex015/user_avatar/community.usconcealedcarry.com/glock45nra/32/111576_2.png) [@Glock45NRA](https://community.usconcealedcarry.com/u/Glock45NRA)\ **Post date:** [May 11, 2024, 11:53am UTC](https://community.usconcealedcarry.com/t/the-aftermath-woman-defends-against-stalker/102471/24 "2024-05-11T11:53:04Z")
In this case the video surveillance camera provided exculpatory evidence to support her actions. In many states an occupied vehicle is considered highly defensible property and a forcible entry would provide the element of reasonableness in self defense and a presumption under the law that the occupant of the vehicle had a reasonable rear of death or serious bodily injury. Presumptions are rebuttable by a prosecutor. The prosecutor made the correct call in my opinion. [Previous page](https://community.usconcealedcarry.com/t/the-aftermath-woman-defends-against-stalker/102471.md?page=1)