Madin’s Violation of Human Rights Time moves on but mankind’s ability to embrace wickedness keeps apace. When an unfortunate person falls into a cyber-trap, the stalking becomes a type of mental assault which intensifies over time. The fact that the stalker can access the victim at any time from any distance undermines the victim’s sense of security. Because of its repetitive nature, cyberstalking (CS) creates intense feelings of fear, terror, intimidation, stress and anxiety in the victim. In every case, though he has no personal connection with these people, Kent Madin has demonstrated that he is prepared to repeatedly persecute anyone who provokes his anger or refuses to submit to his internet interrogations. Madin does not pursue his prey in search of profits. The unrelenting pursuit provides him with an excuse to emotionally torment his quarry. By doing so, the self-described “hunter” has violated the human rights of his victims. Violation of United Nations Human Rights The Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) clearly states that nations who abide by the laws enacted by the United Nations are obliged to enforce international laws that protect individuals from persecution. “ Human rights are rights inherent to all human beings, without distinction as to race, colour, gender, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status. International human rights law lays down obligations which Nations are bound to respect. By becoming parties to international treaties, Nations assume obligations and duties under international law to respect, to protect and to fulfil human rights. The obligation to protect requires Nations to protect individuals against human rights abuses. The obligation to fulfil means that Nations must take positive action to facilitate the enjoyment of basic human rights.” Article 17 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights states: " No one shall be subjected to arbitrary or unlawful interference with his privacy, family, home or correspondence, nor to unlawful attacks on his honour and reputation." http://www.ohchr.org/en/professionalinterest/pages/ccpr.aspx Privacy is " a state in which one is not observed or disturbed by other people ", or " the state of being free from public attention ". Thus Madin’s victims have a global UN-mandated right to privacy. Violation of American Human Rights Moreover, American law reinforces the concept that the privacy of Madin’s victims has been grossly violated. The Right To Have Privacy (4 Harvard L.R. 193 (Dec. 15, 1890)) is a law review article written by Samuel Warren and Louis Brandeis, and published in the 1890 Harvard Law Review . It is " one of the most influential essays in the history of American law" and is widely regarded as the first publication in the United States to advocate a right to privacy, articulating that right primarily as a "right to be let alone ." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Right_to_Privacy_(article) Warren and Brandeis excoriated those who violated the privacy of individuals. “ Gossip is no longer the resource of the idle and of the vicious, but has become a trade, which is pursued with industry as well as effrontery .” The dictionary defines privacy as " a state in which one is not observed or disturbed by other people ", or " the state of being free from public attention ". Yet Madin has inflicted a distressing and demoralising desecration of victim’s privacy during his eleven-year campaign of cyber vengeance, thereby violating International Law (UN), American domestic law and Montana cyber law. Violation of Montana Human Rights Montana law 45-8-213 - Privacy in communications, states, “(1) Except as provided in 45-8-213, a person commits the offense of violating privacy in communications if the person knowingly or purposely: (a) with the purpose to terrify, intimidate, threaten, harass, annoy, or offend, communicates with a person by electronic communication and ... threatens to inflict injury or physical harm to the person. The ... making of a threat ... is prima facie evidence of an intent to terrify, intimidate, threaten, harass, annoy, or offend. (b) uses an electronic communication ... to disturb by repeated communications the peace, quiet, or right of privacy of a person at the place where the communications are received.” (Abridged) Peter Followill, an American attorney, recently published a warning about cyber stalkers. He wrote, “The crime of harassment (which can include stalking, hate crimes, and cyber bullying) occurs when one person acts in a way designed to annoy, provoke, threaten, or otherwise cause another person emotional distress For most crimes, the prosecutor need only show that the defendant did an act that the law has made illegal. The defendant need not have intended the consequences that result. For example, when someone drives recklessly and causes an accident resulting in death, the driver can be charged with vehicular manslaughter because of his driving, even though he didn’t intend to cause an accident or death.” According to the laws of the United Nations, the United States and Montana, Kent Madin has used the internet in a harmful, threatening, abusive, harassing and defamatory manner which has caused intense emotional distress and resulted in the invasion of his victims’ privacy.