Sabrina Carpenterthe virtuoso singer, who continues to shine on and off stage, has been served with a temporary restraining order against a 31-year-old man who had a disturbing vision. The man, identified as William Applegate, tried to break into the Los Angeles home last month and returned twice. Here is the restraining order against Sabrina Carpenter and her stalker.
Sabrina Carpenter expresses her dismay after a stalker tried to break into her home
Fearing for her personal safety, Carpenter wrote in her statement that the man had a pattern of stalking, assault and surveillance, causing her emotional distress. When confronted by security, the alleged stalker refused to leave, saying he knew the ‘Manchild’ singer and was expecting him, according to the BBC. In recent weeks, an intruder went to her home uninvited and tried to break in.Citing a disturbing incident in court documents that occurred on May 23, Carpenter reported that he was at his door after passing the neighbor’s house, rang the doorbell and refused to leave the residence until police authorities arrived. “[He] he concocted the outrageous and completely false claim that he knew me personally and expected me. This was a complete lie,” wrote the ‘Sugar Talking’ singer. In less than 24 hours, he visited his home again and walked outside. The next day, he parked in front of her house.
Sabrina Carpenter’s stalking court visit
Carpenter sent surveillance footage from her doorbell camera and asked for protection for herself and two close relatives who live with her: her sister and her sister’s boyfriend. The judge has issued a temporary restraining order, requiring the man to stay 100 meters away from Sabrina, her house, her car and her workplace, including other neighbors. The next hearing will be on June 17, 2026, when the man is due to go to the criminal court after being arrested for larceny.Disclaimer: The information in this report is based on a legal hearing reported by a third-party source. The details given are allegations made by the parties involved and are not proven facts. The case continues, and a final verdict has not been reached. The publication does not claim that the allegations are true.
