The difference between someone who’s persistent and someone who’s dangerous
The letters arrived at the family home. Handwritten. Addressed to the children.
The client, a prominent US businesswoman, had previously dealt with unwanted attention. But this was different. The sender knew where the children went to school. And then came the line that changed everything: the children would soon be “dead”.
Her security team wanted to escalate immediately. More protection. Armed response.
But protection against what, exactly?
π’ Howlers and πΊ Hunters
This is where most security thinking goes wrong. It treats all unwanted attention the same way. But fixation isn’t one thing. It takes different forms and poses different levels of risk.
I use a simple distinction: howlers and hunters.
π’ Howlers make noise. They send angry messages, post threats online, and occupy huge amounts of your time and energy. But they rarely pose a genuine physical threat. They want a reaction.
πΊ Hunters are different. They don’t announce themselves. They watch, research, and plan. They’re not interested in scaring you β they’re interested in getting close.
Telling them apart takes proper assessment, not guesswork.
π§ The five types
Research has identified five types of stalkers.
- β οΈ The Predatory Stalker is most dangerous β calculated, often sexually motivated β but thankfully rare.
- π¨ The Rejected Stalker, typically an ex-partner, poses the highest risk of actual physical violence.
- π₯ The Resentful Stalker feels wronged and wants punishment and revenge.
- π The Intimacy Seeker believes they have a special connection with their target.
- β The Incompetent Suitor is socially awkward and doesn’t understand that their advances are unwelcome.
Each needs handling differently.
π΅οΈ What we found
In the businesswoman’s case, we investigated the sender and worked with Dr Lorraine Sheridan, our forensic psychologist, to conduct a behavioural analysis.
What we found was someone deeply unwell but with no history of violence, no capability to travel, and no evidence of planning beyond the letters. They were a howler, not a hunter.
The family didn’t need armed protection. They needed to stop responding, remove certain information from public view, and monitor for escalation.
Within months, the letters stopped.
π They know more about you than you think
Fixated individuals will spend days, weeks, even months researching their target. They have nothing but time.
They trawl social media β yours, your family’s, your staff’s. They cross-reference company filings, property records, school websites, and tagged photographs. They piece together your routines, your movements, your connections.
By the time they make contact, they often know more about you than your own security team does.
This is why reducing your digital exposure matters. Our Digital Exposure Assessment shows clients exactly what’s out there and what someone with hostile intent could do with it. For clients on the Defuse Advisory, we continuously monitor and suppress this information.
It won’t stop every threat. But it removes the easy ammunition.
π© Warning signs of escalation
Certain patterns show the risk is increasing:
- Shifting from messages to physically turning up
- References to family, home addresses, and daily routines
- Ignoring legal orders
- Evidence of planning
- Withdrawal from normal life
- Statements suggesting “nothing left to lose.”
The desire for proximity is critical. Fixated individuals trying to get physically close are a different category of concern altogether.
π What advisers need to understand
If a client reports unwanted attention, the instinct is to reassure them or escalate to protection. Neither is necessarily right.
Take it seriously without overreacting. Keep records of everything. Understand who you’re dealing with through proper investigation and behavioural analysis. Then respond proportionately β sometimes that means disengaging entirely, sometimes legal action, sometimes increased security.
Throughout this, we work around the adviser. Your client stays your client.
π― Clarity before reaction
A Chief Security Officer at a US-based family office put it this way:
“Philip is the person who tells me whether my client is actually in danger, and if so, what to do about it. He won’t oversell, he won’t undersell β he’ll just tell me the truth.”
Fixation is frightening because it feels personal. But with proper assessment, you can separate noise from genuine threat and help your client feel safe again.
The question isn’t how scared we should be. It’s who this person is, what they want, and what they are actually capable of.
π£ Help this reach the people who need it
If you know someone who’d benefit from this, please share it.
ποΈ For deeper conversations, the Defuse Global podcast explores real cases and what actually works.
π For the full framework, my book ‘Personal Threat Management: The practitioner’s guide to keeping clients safer‘ Β covers recognising warning behaviours and building a security culture that stops problems before they start.
