As a matter of clarification, I find it pertinent to this thread to post the dictionary definition of that same "forbidden verb" that he apparently thinks to have inherent criminal quotations. That verb is defined as follows from the American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition, 2000:
"To follow or observe a person persistently, especially out of obsession or derangement."
As you will note, there is not so much as a single word in that definition denoting any form of a criminal act, criminal behavior, or any illegality whatsoever. It simply described a psychological affliction of obsession with another person that exhibits itself in persistent observation of that same person.
It should also be noted that all of the other definitions to this same "forbidden verb" in this same dictionary refer to it in a connotation of animal tracking and game hunting, thus the definition intended could not have been confused. As further explanatory note, I previously described and will again describe the pet lunatic's lengthy and documented posting history on this forum to include activities that fit the said "forbidden verb's" definition with precision. As a poster here he:
(1) "observe(d)...persistently" the activities of (2) "a person," in this case being a celebrity former POW, by actively posting upon, and coming to dominate in posting frequency, an abnormally high number of threads, possibly in the hundreds, pertaining to that said former POW celebrity over the course of barely a few months. In doing so he exhibited, through the frequency of both threads and posts upon those threads, that he was doing so (3) "especially out of obsession." He further exhibited a strong degree of (4) "derangement" upon the same subject by posting in excess of a thousand overtly hostile, rude, and intentionally inflamatory posts to dozens if not hundreds of other freepers who so much as even slightly differed in their own personal opinions of that same said former POW celebrity. If anyone disagrees with this characterization I (1) ask that they clarify the reasons as to why the "forbidden verb" does not apply to his very real and very well known behavior as I have described and (2) make it known to the dictionary authors that their commonly accepted definition is deficient in portraying what they believe to be a central feature of the "real" definition of that same "forbidden verb."
It wasn't me that hit it the first time.
In the rest of your post you've falsely accused me of a crime again. In other posts, you've falsely accused me of interstate travel to commit this crime. This is slander. Some people in my area know my handle. You may have to make up any financial losses, if any, your false accusations may cause.