Female stalker from Worcester terrorised married man she "fancied"

Evesham Journal: Female stalker from Worcester terrorised married man she "fancied" Female stalker from Worcester terrorised married man she "fancied"

A WOMAN who harassed a family with a barrage of silent calls because she fancied her married support worker has been jailed.

Lisa Bradley became fixated on Michael Stanley, her support worker for Worcestershire County Council since January.

In a prolonged campaign of harassment, Bradley made repeated “silent” phone calls to Mr Stanley’s home, at times calling the family’s home every seven minutes, and even damaged his car.

He told magistrates that his sleep had been disrupted, he had stopped using social networking sites and had struggled to build relationships with other service users as he once had.

His wife told the court she had been left her fearing for her own and her family’s safety.

Bradley, aged 43, of Grosvenor Walk, St John’s, Worcester, admitted harassment without violence and criminal damage on April 22 when she appeared before magistrates in Worcester.

Mr Stanley said the relationship with Bradley was initially “relaxed” and there were no problems.

Clare Linehan, prosecuting, said Mr Stanley became aware that Bradley had “feelings” for him shortly after the pair had visited Bradley’s mother. He told his manager, knowing it was inappropriate for a professional relationship to continue and a new support worker was appointed.

Mr Stanley then began to receive “silent telephone calls” from the defendant at his home.

Bradley later told police she had found the number and address in the telephone book and even sent a Facebook friend request to his wife.

On April 22 Mr Stanley received a call from his decorator saying he had locked himself in the house after Bradley arrived, asking for Mick and then asked if she could have a pot of paint to throw over the car in the drive.

On his return Mr Stanley found his car had been keyed and the petrol cap removed. Damage to the car was valued at £964.46.

He continued to receive “numerous” silent calls every few minutes which was ongoing through the night and into the morning of the next day.

Bradley was arrested and interviewed on April 23.

Miss Linehan said: “She explained the relationship with Mr Stanley (in police interview), that they were close and talked about personal matters and she accepted she told him she fancied him and had feelings for him.”

She has since breached her bail conditions, contacting him twice, Miss Linehan said.

In a victim personal statement dated May 29 (more than a month after Bradley was arrested) Mr Stanley said: “The defendant has repeatedly breached bail conditions and has continued the harassment of me and my family in our own home.

“I do not know how or when this will stop. It is continuing and getting worse.

“If the law isn’t going to stop her, what will? There is anxiety every time the phone rings. It’s the same when I hear the doorbell.”

He said his sleep had been disrupted, he had stopped using social networking sites and had struggled to build relationships with other service users in the same way he used to.

He said: “This is a gross and unwelcome violation of the most basic right to privacy and security for our family.

“Unless measures are imposed on the defendant I really don’t know where it will end.”

He said he hoped Bradley would recognise ‘the agony she was causing’.

A personal impact statement was also produced by Mr Stanley’s wife who said she feared for her own safety and that of her family.

Susie Duncan, defending, said Bradley had a personality disorder and was recognised as a vulnerable adult.

Mrs Duncan said: “She is normally supported by social services.

Unfortunately, this support has been withdrawn so she is very much on her own since she was first arrested.”

Mrs Duncan said Bradley had told the victim “she fancied him and wanted him to notice her”.

Bradley also “deeply regrets they have been upset by her actions” Mrs Duncan said.

Bradley, who had a restraining order imposed on her in respect of another party in 2008 and breached a restraining order in 2009, was jailed for 16 weeks, two eight week consecutive sentences for each offence (harasssment and criminal damage). She was also made subject to a restraining order in respect of the Stanley family which prevents her entering the area where they live.

Comments (2)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

11:28pm Wed 4 Jun 14

Gillian1961 says...

Why did they not give her a female support worker, mental heath can stir up a lot of different emotions My brother as mental heath issues and was given a female KEY worker she had to help him with doing his shopping and ask if he wanted to have a coffee in the super market he thought he was being asked out on a date i had to put him right, surely this chaps bosses should step in
Why did they not give her a female support worker, mental heath can stir up a lot of different emotions My brother as mental heath issues and was given a female KEY worker she had to help him with doing his shopping and ask if he wanted to have a coffee in the super market he thought he was being asked out on a date i had to put him right, surely this chaps bosses should step in Gillian1961
  • Score: 29

11:04am Sun 15 Jun 14

Lord Newbold says...

Dear Gillian 1961
How enlightening your comments are. You have a family member who suffers from mental health problems. Therefore, you and your family have had trouble with opposite sex clients and social workers.

Now Gillian, I am assuming (which is dangerous) you are not a qualified social worker with a university degree, along with pocketful’s of “A” levels.

Yet you have spotted the one thing that would have eliminated the poor female from thinking her social worker was more than just her aid to recovery.

I hope that those in charge take not of what experience teaches, rather than qualifications.
Dear Gillian 1961 How enlightening your comments are. You have a family member who suffers from mental health problems. Therefore, you and your family have had trouble with opposite sex clients and social workers. Now Gillian, I am assuming (which is dangerous) you are not a qualified social worker with a university degree, along with pocketful’s of “A” levels. Yet you have spotted the one thing that would have eliminated the poor female from thinking her social worker was more than just her aid to recovery. I hope that those in charge take not of what experience teaches, rather than qualifications. Lord Newbold
  • Score: 2

Comments are closed on this article.

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree