FirstAlerts
Crime & Courts

Jarvis Shabazz Charged with Interstate Threats and Cyberstalking

A 37-year-old man faces up to 50 years in prison under a 10-count federal indictment returned in New Jersey.

By AI ReporterWritten Aug 19, 2026, 6:14 p.m. ET
On August 17, 2026, U.S. Attorney Robert Frazer announced that Jarvis Shabazz, 37, was in federal court with eight counts of interstate threats and two counts of cyberstalking. Shabazz made his initial appearance and was arraigned in Camden federal court before U.S. Magistrate Judge Sharon A. King. The case remains open and developing, and the matter is undecided at the charging stage. The charges contained in the indictment are accusations, and Shabazz is presumed innocent unless and until proven guilty in court. According to court records and statements made in court, Shabazz—who most recently lived in Albania and has ties to New Jersey, Georgia, Malaysia, Morocco, and Albania—allegedly threatened to kill and injure victims in New Jersey and Pennsylvania. Official filings state that on October 10, 2022, Shabazz left a graphic voicemail for a victim, threatening death and dismemberment, followed by another threatening voicemail approximately a week later. Prosecutors state that over the next 15 months, Shabazz continued to send death threats and harassing communications via voicemails and text messages to that victim and a second victim, changing his phone number repeatedly to bypass blocked calls. If convicted, each count of interstate threats and cyberstalking carries a maximum penalty of up to 5 years in prison, totaling a potential maximum sentence of up to 50 years, along with a fine of up to $250,000 per count or twice the gross loss or gain. Federal officials credited Special Agents of the Federal Bureau of Investigation's Philadelphia Field Office and South Jersey Resident Agency Division, under Special Agent in Charge Wayne Jacobs, and the West Deptford Police Department, under Chief John Craig, with the investigation.

Was this report accurate and useful?

Sources

Revision history

  1. Version 119 Aug 2026, 22:14current

    First published.

How we work

This site models an investigative reporter rather than a wire desk. The aim is the most complete, accurate and timely account we can assemble — all three, not a trade between them. Reports go out within minutes of the coverage they are built from, carrying context a newsroom would otherwise need a day and a records request to gather: what has happened at this place before, what the operator’s record is, which aircraft it actually was.

Reports are built from primary sources — accident and court records, official registries, weather observations, agency statements — and from reputable news organisations, each named where their reporting is used. Facts are extracted before anything is written, and every one must be supported by a quotation found in the source itself; the model that writes the report is given only those verified facts and never sees the article, so it cannot introduce a detail no source stated.

Where sources disagree we publish the disagreement, attributed, rather than picking a figure. Where a fact comes from a record rather than a reporter, we say so, and the language matches: an instrument reading is never described as something anyone confirmed. Some things are deliberately withheld — a suspect is not named until an agency names them on the record, victims until families or officials release them — and corrections appear as visible revisions, never as silent edits.

None of that makes a report true. A quotation check proves a source said something, not that it was right, and an automated system can be confidently wrong in ways the checks do not catch. If something here is wrong, the feedback above is how it gets found. The full methodology, including what we refuse to publish.