A Los Angeles Superior Court judge has awarded Kirsten Dunst a restraining order against a man who was arrested for trespassing on her property.
Dunst was granted the restraining order last Wednesday against Christopher Smith, after the man showed up at her property and attempted to enter her home, according to the court papers obtained by Access Hollywood.
“Given this sudden, aggressive, and harassing behavior, I am quite frightened of Mr. Smith and feel that my personal safety, and the personal safety of those around me, is in jeopardy,” Dunst said in her declaration to the court.
According to reports filed by Hollywood detectives, Smith attempted to contact the actress at her home on four occasions and on two of those, he managed to get past a gate and on to her property. As Smith had been warned on a previous outing not to return, Dunst’s personal assistant and housemate, Elizabeth Donohue, performed a private citizen’s arrest of the man on the evening of November 20.
He was taken into custody by officers later that night.
In the Defendant’s statement, following his arrest, Smith told officers: “I was arrested for stalking. I know that was bad, I hope I can get off with a warning.”
Smith said he “learned” his lesson and explained his reasons for going to the actress’ house.
“I’m in love with Kirsten, so I went to her house,” he said.
“I connected with Kirsten spiritually,” he is also quoted as saying. “I felt like I connected with her and she connected with me. Now I don’t know if she did. I guess you have to ask her if she connected.”
In Dunst’s statement, she says she has no desire to ever be contacted by Smith.
Dunst’s security agent, Bill Durney of Insite Security, claims in his declaration to the court that Smith was put on a 72-hour psychiatric hold, following his arrest.
In making the request for the restraining order, David Harris, Dunst’s attorney, asked the court not to notify Smith of the restraining order request before it was approved.
“Based on the sudden, aggressive, and threatening behavior of the respondent, Christopher smith, the petitioner and I fear that it would be dangerous to give notice that the petitioner is seeking protection prior to such protection being in place,” Harris’ statement read.