Is an Attorney Able to Use the Word 'Stalk'

[LeroyBrownATL]

My question involves criminal law for the state of: FL

Please help settle this debate for me...

Is an attorney able to use the word 'stalk' in describing the actions of a person (who is not a law enforcement officer) who has followed another person even though that person was attempting to evade being followed and this all ends up in a physical altercation?

For example, Person A first starting following Person B along the sidewalks of an apartment complex, then Person B took notice and diverted from the sidewalk to behind the apartment building in an attempt to avoid Person A but was still pursued by Person A. Person A is being accused of assault from the ensuing altercation that took place.

Now, according to the dictionary definition of stalk, to say that Person A was 'stalking' Person B is appropriate. That said, the Florida Statue of Stalking defines it as something different.

If an attorney were attempting to describe those actions and used the word 'stalk' specifically to describe those actions, and not in reference to Florida statute 784.048, would the judge strike that word from the record and bar its further use because it's not in reference of the statute, or would the judge allow the word to be used because it is technically an accurate term in describing the actions?

The attorney isn't attempting to create a case for 'stalking,' the legal term, but is attempting use accurate language in describing the actions of Person A.

One of us thinks it would be barred from the court because if an attorney uses the word 'stalk' it must be pertaining to the legal definition, and the other feels that it would be acceptable because there is an understood difference between using the word stalk in seeking a conviction for stalking, and using the word 'stalk' to describe someone's physical pursuit of someone.

Please help! Any answers would be greatly appreciated.

[flyingron]

Attorneys are protected by the first amendment, too. What are you getting at? Attorneys speak English in addition to florida statutes.
I see no basis for your position.

[LeroyBrownATL]

Thank you for the reply. Please let me know if this explanation is a bit clearer...

Here's what I'm getting at...I'm having a discussion with a friend regarding Trayvon Martin, and one of us stated that Zimmerman 'stalked' Martin and the other said that an attorney couldn't use that word in the court of law because its usage isn't exactly what the Florida statute defines as stalking, dictionary definitions be darned, because it is prejudicial, and Zimmerman isn't being charged with stalking.

If it is indeed prejudicial, then would it be unacceptable for an attorney for an attempted rape victim to describe the defendant's actions of following the victim as 'stalking' the victim? If the attempted rapist didn't know the victim prior to that, and his following of the victim was limited to that one interaction only, could the defendant's actions be referred to as 'stalking' in the court of law in Florida, even though the legal definition of stalking would require more than physically attempting to 'catch' a person one time?

Legal Florida definition of stalking:

(2) Any person who willfully, maliciously, and repeatedly follows, harasses, or cyberstalks another person commits the offense of stalking, a misdemeanor of the first degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082 or s. 775.083.
(3) Any person who willfully, maliciously, and repeatedly follows, harasses, or cyberstalks another person, and makes a credible threat with the intent to place that person in reasonable fear of death or bodily injury of the person, or the person’s child, sibling, spouse, parent, or dependent, commits the offense of aggravated stalking, a felony of the third degree, punishable as provided in s.

Websters Definition of stalking:

: to pursue quarry or prey stealthily
2
: to walk stiffly or haughtily
transitive verb
1
: to pursue by stalking
2
: to go through (an area) in search of prey or quarry <stalk the woods for deer>
3
: to pursue obsessively and to the point of harassment

If I am reading your reply correctly, then it would be acceptable in a court of law to describe someone's actions as stalking if they fit the dictionary's definition of physically stalking someone, so long as you're not seeking a stalking conviction, correct?

[PTPD22]

The lawyer would be free to describe the person's actions as "stalking." It would be up to the opposing lawyer to put that (or any other) description in context for the jury.