Whenever a man does a thoroughly stupid thing, it is always from the noblest motives . . . The Government alleges that on or about February through February 10, 2010, Defendant committed the crime of Interstate Stalking in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2261A. . . . In June 2009, L.B., the alleged victim, met Defendant at Arizona State University. They attended the same course, which included a three week trip to Russia which they both attended. L.B. and Defendant had coffee one time, and L.B. determined she was not interested in him. L.B. returned home to New Jersey after the conclusion of the course at A.S.U.

While in New Jersey, on August 28, 2009, Defendant contacted L.B. via her internet Facebook account. In September 2009, L.B. returned to the University of Rochester, located in Rochester, New York. On February 6, 2010, Defendant sent L.B. an e-mail and several others between February 6 and 8, 2010. In one e-mail, Defendant stated that he had a “powerful longing” for L.B. He also stated, in a text message, that he wanted L.B.’s forgiveness for having been “a jerk, a masochist and even a criminal all this time.. . .”
On February 8, 2010, L.B. received two phone messages from Defendant in which he said he was in Rochester and wanted to see her. On February 8, 2010, L.B. received an e-mail from the University of Rochester Common Connection, advising her that a florist had flowers for her to pick up. L.B. called the florist and learned that the flowers were from Defendant. On February 11, 2010, the flower shop advised Investigator Lafferty that Defendant personally came into the shop on February 5, 2010 and ordered the flowers for L.B.

On February 9, 2010, . . .Defendant stated that he flew to Rochester on February 4, 2010 and went to the University of Rochester’s campus trying to find L.B. Defendant explained how he tried to contact L.B. through e-mails, phone messages, through Professor Laura Givens, and through flowers and gifts. He indicated that he saw L.B. during his weekend in Rochester, including one occasion in the library. He stated that he did not get any closer to her than 10 to 15 feet, and did not want to make eye contact with her. L.B. told the police that she suffered substantial emotional distress as a result of Defendant traveling to Rochester and trying to contact her.

. . . Title 18 U.S.C. § 2261A provides, in relevant part, that: Whoever- (1) travels in interstate . . . commerce . . . with the intent to kill, injure, harass, or intimidate or to place under surveillance with intent to kill, injure, harass or intimidate another person, and in the course of, or as a result of, such travel places that person in reasonable fear of the death, or serious bodily injury to, or causes substantial emotional distress to that person, a member of the immediate family . . . of that person, or the spouse or intimate partner of that person . . . shall be punished as provided in section 2261(b). Section 2261A has three elements: (1) interstate travel occurred; (2) a defendant’s intent was to injure or harass another person; and (3) the person defendant intended to harass or injure was placed in reasonable fear of death or serious bodily injury to herself or a member of her family as a result of that travel. Defendant does not dispute the first and third elements. Rather, Defendant argues that the Government has not established probable cause that his interstate travel was done with the “intent to harass” or with the “intent to place under surveillance with the intent to harass,” the alleged victim, L.B.

Questions:

1. What are the elements necessary to convict a defendant under the federal stalking statute, 18 U.S.C. 2261A?
2. What is defendant’s legal argument? Do you think the defendant acted with the “intent to harass” L.B.?