Zb-2-B: 凌晨门铃骚扰事件——针对申诉人的模糊式威胁行为
Late-Night Doorbell Harassment – Ambiguous Threats Against the Complainant

事件时间与情境

2025年5月3日凌晨3:00至4:00之间，我在家中独自休息期间，遭遇一名陌生男子连续多次按响门铃，持续时间超过30分钟。
该行为发生在深夜，无任何事先通知或明确来访目的，整栋公寓处于安静状态，无邻居目击，也无监控设备记录。

来人行为描述

• 来人语气平静，但语言模糊。我刚从睡梦中惊醒，仅听到其似乎自称名为“Alekes”；
• 他说过一句“我需要你”，但未解释任何来意、机构、职务身份；
• 当我对其说“你有我电话，那你可以打给我”时，对方保持沉默，随后离开；
• 整个过程中，该男子未表现出醉酒或精神错乱状态，行为理性而目的不明。

事件分析

此事件存在多项明显异常之处：
1. 选择凌晨3-4点这一时间段进行长时间门铃骚扰，明显规避目击者，制造心理恐慌感；
2. 对方掌握我的住址和姓名，声称“有我的电话”，但拒绝通过正规方式联系我；
3. 行为持续、沉默、模糊，符合心理干预或测试性骚扰的典型特征；
4. 该事件发生时间紧接着我向联合国提交案件UR/CCPR/25/DNK/6，并向移民局询问空白信件之时，属于高敏感时期；
5. 该行为未能通过任何正式或法律渠道确认目的与合法性。

初步结论

我认为该事件并非普通随机骚扰，而是具备以下特征的疑似国家相关方或受其指使者的“模糊式恐吓行为”：
• 形式模糊、不构成法律暴力，却足以产生心理压迫；
• 不留物理证据、避免违法记录，造成“可否认性”；
• 与我递交国际申诉时间密切相关，极可能意图制造退缩、恐惧、混乱等反应。

该行为与此前收到的空白正式信件事件（Z-2-A）一同构成一组系统性“非公开报复行为”的早期表现。
我在此请求联合国将此事件一并纳入我案件的附加材料中，并记录我所面临的非直接暴力、但具有现实心理威胁性质的干预行为。

Incident Time and Context

Between 3:00 AM and 4:00 AM on May 3, 2025, while I was alone at home and asleep, I was subjected to repeated doorbell ringing by an unknown male individual. The ringing lasted for over 30 minutes, with no prior notice or clear purpose. The apartment building was completely quiet at the time, with no witnesses and no security cameras in place.

Behavior of the Visitor

• The man spoke calmly but unclearly. I had just woken up and could only hear him say his name was “Alekes”;
• He said something that sounded like “I need you,” but provided no explanation of who he was, what he wanted, or any organizational affiliation;
• When I replied, “If you have my phone number, then you can call me,” he did not respond and eventually left;
• His behavior was coherent, not intoxicated or irrational, and appeared purposeful despite the vagueness.

Incident Analysis

There are several highly suspicious aspects of this event:
1. The incident occurred at 3–4 AM, an unusual time clearly intended to avoid witnesses and maximize psychological impact;
2. The visitor knew my address and claimed to have my phone number, yet refused to use any formal method of contact;
3. The prolonged, silent, ambiguous interaction fits the profile of behavioral harassment or a psychological pressure tactic;
4. The timing of the incident closely follows my submission to the United Nations (UR/CCPR/25/DNK/6) and my inquiry regarding the blank letter from the Danish Immigration Service, making this period highly sensitive;
5. The nature of the incident evades formal classification as illegal, while still delivering a clear psychological and coercive signal.

Preliminary Conclusion

I do not believe this was a random occurrence. Instead, it bears the hallmarks of a low-level intimidation effort, possibly involving state actors or individuals acting on their behalf:
• It deliberately avoids overt threats but induces fear, confusion, and isolation;
• It is carefully structured to leave no physical evidence or legal traces, creating plausible deniability;
• It aligns temporally with the escalation of my international complaint, suggesting it is part of a larger campaign of informal retaliation.

This incident, when considered together with the blank letter from the Danish Immigration Service (Z-2-A), forms part of an emerging pattern of soft pressure and psychological harassment.
I respectfully request that the United Nations document this event as a supplementary component of my complaint (UR/CCPR/25/DNK/6) and recognize the non-physical yet real threats I am currently facing as a complainant under state scrutiny.