The crux is that all crimes have a list of elements which must be proven before the whole thing is a crime, or tort. Breaking this one down hypothetically using

The crux is that all crimes have a list of elements which must be proven before the whole thing is a crime, or tort. Breaking this one down hypothetically using California’s Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress law, the plaintiff must prove that someone did something outrageous, that the defendant intended to cause emotional distress, that there was emotional distress, and that the emotional distress was from the defendants actions. So each of those individual things must be alleged, and proven with evidence. This is why they always allege things like being terrorized rather than not stating the obvious, because they wouldn’t be successful because they didn’t meet all the elements of the crime, or tort. Note in the California law, it can be less than intentional (meaning, wanted and intended for the distress to happen) and can be as low as recklessly did something that they should have known would have caused distress, a lower bar than “intentional” for this particular element. https://www.justia.com/trials-litigation/docs/caci/1600/1600/ https://www.justia.com/trials-litigation/docs/caci/1600/1600...