Selena Gomez's Stalker Dismissed; Case Tossed Against Thomas Broadnicki

LOS ANGELES -- A judge on Wednesday dismissed a criminal case against a man charged with stalking Selena Gomez, saying he did not believe prosecutors had shown he intended to cause the actress and singer to be afraid.

The dismissal will free Thomas Broadnicki, 46, who was charged earlier this month with stalking Gomez between July and October.

The starlet was not present for Wednesday's preliminary hearing during which a prosecutor attempted to show there was probable cause for Brodnicki to stand trial.

Brodnicki has a history of mental illness and was being held on $150,000 bail after his arrest on Oct. 31. Mental health workers had notified authorities that he had threatened to kill the starlet while on a psychiatric hold.

"We strenuously objected" to the dismissal, district attorney's spokeswoman Sandi Gibbons said. She said Superior Court Judge Edmund Willcox Clarke Jr. ruled Brodnicki "did not have the intent to cause fear."

Gibbons said the office is evaluating its options, which could include re-filing the case at a later date.

A civil restraining order requiring Brodnicki to stay 100 yards away from Gomez remains in place. A hearing is scheduled for Nov. 23 to determine whether the stay-away order will remain in place for the next three years.

Gomez, 19, wrote in a sworn declaration that she is in "extreme fear" of Brodnicki.

Brodnicki was represented by Deputy Public Defender Nick Stewart-Oaten, who did not immediately return a phone message seeking comment.

___

Comments

[wakyracir]

12:17 AM on 02/24/2012

I guess the judge must have dozed off and missed the part where "Mental health workers had notified authorities that he had threatened to kill the starlet while on a psychiatric hold."

[loupgarous]

12:19 PM on 11/20/2011

Can you recall a Superior Court judge in California? I'd say this would be what's to do with Edmund Willcox Clarke, Jr. The man threatened the life of the woman before mental health workers. Does the standard of proof that he intends harm to Selena rise any higher?

[Brett Tonaille]

02:52 PM on 11/17/2011

This is simply horrifying. This guy has already said he wants to KILL her.
Among a host of stalking stories, one is of a waitress in Florida whose customer started to stalk her. She finally moved to another town and took another job. He kept sending her irate notes and came to that town. When she tried to get an order of protection against him, the judge simply didn't see the problem.
Soon after that the man showed up at her workplace, shot her dead and killed himself.
Just what does it take for judges to take these creeps seriously?

[Okey Umez]

04:24 PM on 11/17/2011

Unfortunately some judges do not believe in preemptive law enforcement. Intent is a hard thing to prove. You almost have to have a catastrophic incident, in order to get a judges attention.

[loupgarous]

12:28 PM on 11/20/2011

The law in Florida is clear and the staker in that case broke it:

"Section 784.048. STALKING; DEFINITIONS; PENALTIES. 1997.

(1) As used in this section, the term:

(a) "Harass" means to engage in a course of conduct directed at a specific person that causes substantial emotional distress in such person and serves no legitimate purpose.

(b) "Course of conduct" means a pattern a conduct composed of series of acts over a period of time, however short, evidencing a continuity of purpose. Constitutionally protected activity is not included within the meaning of "course of conduct." Such constitutionally protected activity includes picketing or other organized protests.

(c) "Credible threat" means a threat made with the intent to cause the person who is the target of the threat to reasonably fear for his or her safety. The threat must be against the life of, or a threat to cause bodily injury to, a person.

(2) Any person who willfully, maliciously, and repeatedly follows or harasses another person commits the offense of stalking, a misdemeanor of the first degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082 or s. 775.083.

(3) Any person who willfully, maliciously, and repeatedly follows or harasses another person, and makes a credible threat with the intent to place that person in reasonable fear of death or bodily injury, commits the offense of aggravated stalking, a felony of the third degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084."

[Imaginary Grace]

02:51 PM on 11/17/2011

Well if anything happens, she will get the satisfaction of a "told you so" -

[loupgarous]

12:29 PM on 11/20/2011

Assuming the services of a medium won't be required to deliver the "I told you so" from beyond the grave.

[Imaginary Grace]

09:27 PM on 11/20/2011

I'll put Chip Coffey on notice.

[cdiasmd]

01:34 PM on 11/17/2011

"I strenuously object?" Is that how it works? Hm? "Objection." "Overruled." "Oh, no, no, no. No, I STRENUOUSLY object."

[Sol76]

09:30 AM on 11/17/2011

Maybe the judge has a secret crush on Bieber and is so jealous of Gomez that he is orchestrating her demise.

[Kevin Arthus]

08:56 AM on 11/17/2011

"Mental health workers had notified authorities that he had threatened to kill the starlet while on a psychiatric hold...did not believe prosecutors had shown he intended to cause the actress and singer to be afraid"

Hmmm....

[Glen Hazelwood]

08:16 AM on 11/17/2011

I guess the judge decided 30 seconds didn't qualify as stalking.

Oh wait.....wrong guy.....my bad. heh...

www.planetcommonsense.wordpress.com