Riccola wrote:One thing I left out is that most textbooks make mention of that schizophrenics will often say they are being prosecuted by the CIA, FBI ect. Whether is was put in books because someone wanted to for this exact reason or its just a coincidence its a safe bet that any psychiatrist in training will not take any case of electronic harassment seriously.
I recommend targets avoid stating things as facts which they can't prove. Many targets will finger the CIA or FBI, claiming as a fact they are responsible. We can't prove that to a courtroom standard at this time. What we can prove is that both agencies have committed similar crimes in the past and that is publicly documented.
But that isn't enough for us to claim they are responsible this time around.
I recommend sticking only with what we can prove as fact, and telling only the simplest basics of the crime to any non-target. When targets "gush" everything in their mind, making no distinction between fact and theories, guesses, opinions, or speculation -- that's when they get into trouble.
Basically, if targets want to be taken seriously, they have to make use of the communications skills they were taught in high school and college. To assist targets with that, I've condensed those principles into a 2-page quick reference at this URL:
http://www.randomcollection.info/comm-principles.pdfI've collected much of what we can prove into an e-booklet that some crisis support staffers have actually thanked me for, and use as a "desk reference" when people approach them about organized stalking. That e-booklet is available in several languages here:
http://www.stopos.infosquirrel1