> Cops can’t do much if you’re worried someone will harm you or a loved one.

You're right, and that would be a scary situation... if they didn't have more than enough evidence for the police to get involved. Repeated, late-night visits to leave threatening messages would be plenty for a restraining order in the U.S., or at the very least to spur further police investigation.

> What actually effective steps can you take if someone is harassing a female in your life?

In this case, her brothers could have taken turns driving home from work with her, walking her to her car, sleeping over at her place, while they waited for police to proceed with investigation. They could have helped her get connected with a self-defense course, or bought her mace (depending on legality).

Stalkers/harassers can make people feel extremely helpless, and yes, there are a lot of really horrible situations where cops are useless despite an obvious threat.

This... is not one of those situations.

> The confession was online

The confession was made possible via their "antics", because he knew he'd been caught. Without the experience of being cornered and having to escape, he'd have likely ignored the message as a fishing expedition.

> they already had the vehicle ID

Getting that was part of their "antics", yes.

Restraining order against whom exactly? The masked man? Also, what tactical protection do you think a restraining order provides against someone with actual intent to harm?

> In this case, her brothers could have taken turns driving home from work with her, walking her to her car, sleeping over at her place, while they waited for police to proceed with investigation. They could have helped her get connected with a self-defense course, or bought her mace (depending on legality).

All good suggestions. Unfortunately, everything other than self-defense is a temporary (and likely not sustainable) countermeasure. Regarding the self-defense strategy, barring effective weapon use, the odds aren't in the target's favor given 1/ the size discrepancy (they even talk about how burly the stalker was) and 2/ the fact that the assailant has the element of surprise. It's sad that the only viable option seems to be "carry a weapon, train in martial arts, wait for an incident and hope you're able to defend against it." This is not preventative. It's reactionary.

> This... is not one of those situations.

I disagree.

3 burly overprotective brothers vs some creepy stalker dude who shows up late at night like a coward? Those are odds that I'd totally put on the brother's side. Since the cops had already "Sorry, not much we can do"ed the sister, I'd happily be big brothering up and taking that confrontational risk.

(I'd also happily do it with barley plausibly denial "sporting equipment" in hand as well - 3 burly Scottish brothers carrying cricket bats vs one cowardly late night creepy stalker? And if ever needed I'd try on the "Why yes officer, we were all on our way back to our sister's house from a late night cricket practice when we discovered a man interfering with our sister's car!" line.)

The path from "call police" to "bad guy caught" to "bad guy in jail" is non-linear.

Car chase & citizens arrest is where we can argue lines were crossed, sure.

But, the cops were not going to do a multi-night, multi-hour, multi-man surveillance operation to catch the guy in the act.

At the very least, the brothers needed to do this to collect evidence about who the guy was, and hand that over to the cops. Or contact him by phone/social media to let him know they know who he is and what he has been doing.

Notify the cops. Track the guy down. Go to the station and request someone come out with you. This takes cops off the desk, which they’re rarely against unless you’re a nutter.

Or undocumented, or a member of another group for whom interactions with the police are potentially dangerous.

Or for that matter, what if you are "a nutter?" People with mental illness also get stalked, and also deserve protection. Going in person to the police station is unwise for so so many reasons for so many people.

If this approach works for you then cool, for you. It's not going to work for most of us.

They're not there to help you, little bike owner. They're there to ensure the value extraction and capital accumulation machine stays lubricated.

1. https://www.kron4.com/news/bay-area/boudin-forced-to-rent-u-...

2. https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=163878616863437...

Is this something you have actual experience with? Because it doesn't sound plausible to me. Of course, I don't know where you live so it could be different there.

Beyond that, move somewhere with a strong castle doctrine, where you can own a firearm.

This isn't a new problem for societies and there are good solutions, which have been eroded over time. If you can't shoot intruders in your house without consequence, you are living in a failing state. If the police can't be relied upon to keep repeat offenders away from you and your property, you are living in a failing state.

What nonsense. I live in Japan, where it is practically impossible to obtain a firearm. The same would be true for the OP in Scotland. Neither should be considered a failing state except under your ridiculous definition.