(Louise) Marguerite is misinformed about the legal definition of "cyberstalking". Notice she doesn't have a link to the actual California law on her website. I'm not surprised that Marguerite has no hard evidence attached to this story. No police reports, emails or letters.  She overuses the word "stalker" and "threat". She plays heavily on the sympathy of the reader. There are many misspelled words. I would think she would at least use spell check. Louise has never been arrested, arraigned or convicted of "stalking". (See cases 98M13100 and 99M01994 Sacramento, California.). Instead of referring to free speech as crap. Marguerite should embrace the 1^st amendment as it has afforded her the right to post this pack of lies.. Marguerite concerned about privacy, has used her real name, and has disclosed where she attends school. Along with a link to her email. I believe Marguerite has just waived her right to privacy via her website.

Marguerite) Prior to my experience, I had always thought of stalking as something very rare and I think that was based on my attributions that stalking was more or less uncommon, perpetrated by a man (generally an ex-lover or spouse) and happened predominantly to people in large cities. However in the case of my stalker few of these attributions matched; my stalker proved to be a woman.
In the early spring of 1998 my boyfriend separated from his former wife to pursue a divorce and a new beginning.
Louise) "Former wife" Louise was still very much married to Scott. Scott never pursued the divorce. Louise filed for divorce after Scott had become physically abusive with her.
Marguerite) It was during this period that I fell in love with him and we approached an intimate relationship after having been the closest of friends for years.
Louise) The affair started in June of '97. Hardly constitutes years. They were not friends but lovers only. As reported to Louise by Marguerite.
Marguerite) The divorce proceedings were already in motion and Scott and I were caught up in the joys that constitute a new relationship. In fact, the boy I had been engaged to for two years and I had just recently separated and I was overjoyed at the thrill of a new romance after the disappointment of the one before. Over the next few months while I was still working on my undergraduate degree, Scott and I became truly inseparable.
L) Divorce proceedings had begun by Louise. (see divorce petition 98FL06320) Marguerite was overjoyed all right. Overjoyed that she had broken up yet another relationship. Going after men already spoken for, was her MO. Undergraduate degree? Marguerite is now in her 5^th year of college. How long does it take to get a degree? Inseparable? Sure they were. So she could control his every move and plot her revenge against Louise.
M) When school commenced for the semester for me, Scott helped me move my things out of my dorm and I moved in with him for the summer months. I had no idea that during the time I had been so happily caught up in the throes of my new relationship someone had been watching all along.
L) Paranoid delusion? No one was watching. In fact Louise was unaware that anyone was involved with her soon to be ex-husband. She had to move back into the dorm, because Marguerite's mother would not pay for her education if she were living with a boy.
M) The last week in July 1998 while Scott was at work a letter from *Louise (his former wife) came in the mail. I set it aside and gave it to Scott at dinner that evening. Louise had enclosed several pictures of herself in this letter, mainly of her in compromising positions and barely dressed, and a letter informing him that she'd stopped the divorce proceedings before they had been put through, wanting to work out their differences and reconcile.
L) The letter in question was hand delivered to Scott at his work. Again Louise was very much not his "former wife". There were no pictures of Louise in compromising positions and barely dressed. (see Louise's website) They were wedding photos, and photos of Scott with his family. The letter was to finalize the relationship and to give the go ahead to move on. No reconcile was written in this letter. Marguerite has not offered any such letter as evidence.
M) The next day Louise showed up at Scott's business with more pictures, this time to include wedding photos and more inappropriate photographs. When Scott asked her to leave, she became hysterical and Scott told her he was involved in another relationship.
L) Louise showed up at Scott's work to drop off personal items to him. I'm not sure what Marguerite considers inappropriate photographs. They were wedding photos of Scott with his family.  He then informed Louise that he was involved with someone else. He failed to inform her that it had been going on for over a year. That he had been having an affair for 8 months during the marriage. Louise left hurt but not hysterical. Scott begged Louise to stay so they could talk. Scott even reached out and tried to hug Louise. She refused.                                     Back to Main Menu
1    2    3    4    5    6    7    8    9    10    11    12    13    14   15