A greater awareness of the link between delusional fixations on public figures and subsequent attacks could aid prevention. Equally importantly, recognition would encourage earlier intervention in people who, irrespective of whether they eventually attack, have delusional preoccupations which ruin their lives.

This paper considers the problem created by those who harbour unusually intense fixations on public figures. It examines the nature of such pathological fixations and how they differ from the wide range of normal concerns which lead people to communicate with, and even occasionally harass, politicians and other prominent persons. In those harbouring a pathological fixation, there often emerges a pattern of stalking-type behaviour, with repeated attempts at communication and/ or contact which create concern. In a small number, the fixation either remains hidden or leads to attempts to communicate about, rather than to, the subject. Occasionally, such a fixation will come to attention with some dramatic approach, or even attack, on the individual with whom the fixated person has been preoccupied. Fixated people are of concern, not just because they create problems for public figures and their security systems, but because many are seriously mentally ill individuals in need of care, who in most cases cause harm only to their own lives and well-being.

An archival descriptive study of public figure attackers in the United States between 1995 and 2015 was undertaken. Fifty-six incidents were identified, primarily through exhaustive internet searches, composed of 58 attackers and 58 victims. A code book was developed which focused upon victims, offenders, pre-attack behaviors including direct threats, attack characteristics, post-offense and other outcomes, motivations and psychological abstracts. The average interrater agreement for coding of bivariate variables was 0.835 (intraclass correlation coefficient). The three most likely victim categories were politicians, judges, and athletes. Attackers were males, many with a psychiatric disorder, most were grandiose, and most had both a violent and nonviolent criminal history. The known motivations for the attacks were often angry and personal, the most common being dissatisfaction with a judicial or other governmental process (23%). In only one case was the primary motivation to achieve notoriety. Lethality risk during an attack was 55%. Collateral injury or death occurred in 29% of the incidents. Only 5% communicated a direct threat to the target beforehand. The term "publicly intimate figure" is introduced to describe the sociocultural blurring of public and private lives among the targets, and its possible role in some attackers' perceptions and motivations.

No abstract

Detailed comparison of factors associated with abnormal approach to the prominent and with escalation from communication to approach has not hitherto been undertaken. This partially reflects the failure of individual studies to adopt compatible terminologies. This study involves a careful dissection of six public figure studies, three involving U.S. politicians, two Hollywood celebrities, and one the British Royal Family. Common findings were unearthed across six headings. Approachers were significantly more likely to exhibit serious mental illness, engage in multiple means of communication, involve multiple contacts/targets, and to incorporate into their communication requests for help. They were significantly less likely to use threatening or antagonistic language in their communications, except in those cases involving security breaches. These results emphasize the importance of integrating mental health findings and preventive measures into risk management. Approach should not be regarded as a single behavioral category and has multiple motivations. Future studies should adopt standard terminology, preferably taken from the general stalking research.