Chef Ablazey Case Study

Our client, Annika Tesyev, has been charged with stalking Chef Gent Ablazey. The charge stems from a report filed by Chef Ablazey in which he alleges that on four separate occasions over the last week, Ms. Tesyev “used his car to send [him] a message.” Chef Ablazey asserts that while touring various restaurants across Georgia promoting his new cookbook, he returned to his vehicle to find Ms. Tesyev had left messages and food items on the hood of his car. Specifically, he states that Ms. Tesyev left large quantities of raw and rotten food on the hood of his car along with messages such as “YOU ARE PATHETIC” and “GARBAGE COOK.” Chef Ablazey also claims that on one occasion he observed Ms. Tesyev running across the parking lot, entering a parked

The case of Burke v. State held that a single contact with the victim, in violation of a protective order, did not constitute the requisite pattern or course of action required by the statute. Burke, 676 S.E.2d at 769-70. In addition, the case of Autry v. State, 701 S.E.2d 596 (Ga. Ct. App. 2010), held that the defendant’s act of following the victim in his car and watching her go in and out of the store did not demonstrate the requisite pattern of harassing or intimidating behavior. Autry, 701 S.E.2d at 599. However, the majority of the cases found that contacting the victim on more than one occasion demonstrated the requisite

Ms. Tesyev’s case is distinguishable from Placanica v. State because unlike the victim in that case, Chef Ablazey never claimed to be afraid or distressed. In fact, Chef Ablazey stated that he did not initially call the police because he is “used to dealing with people who don’t like him that much.” He also stated that he finally called the police because he could not afford to continue to have his car re-washed and re-waxed. Similarly, unlike the defendant in Kilby v. State, Ms. Tesyev was not attempting to contact Chef Ablazey at the restaurants, and Chef Ablazey stated that he saw Ms. Tesyev only once, while she was driving away. In this regard, Ms. Tesyev’s case more closely aligns with that of Moran v. State. Not only was Chef Ablazey not aware of Ms. Tesyev’s conduct at the time it was occurring, there is a complete lack of evidence that he was afraid or distressed in any way. On the contrary, Chef Ablazey testified that his only and primary concern was that of the potential cosmetic damage to his