We’ve joked in the past about how no jail can hold Marion “Mayor for Life” Barry, but so far this latest brush with the law for the current Ward 8 D.C. Council member does appear unlikely to come to anything beyond more embarrassing headlines.

Before today’s fairly humdrum press conference with Barry’s attorney, Fred Cooke (Barry himself did not say a word, and Cooke gave a more or less boilerplate denial: “It is our hope that a careful review of the facts and circumstances by the Office of the United States Attorney will lead that office to conclude that no charges should be formally filed or lodged against Mr. Barry,” he said. See the video above, courtesy NBCwashington.com, for more), we knew that the alleged victim, Donna Watts-Brighthaupt, had already said that she doesn’t plan on pressing charges. Watts-Brighthaupt did release a somewhat rambling public statement indicating she is irritated with Barry and resents the way his spokesperson portrayed her at Sunday’s press conference, but mostly she just seems to be after an apology from Barry for having her ex-husband tossed out of the John A. Wilson Building during a recent event held at city hall.

It is hard, however, to make sense of Watts-Brighthaupt’s repeated denials that Barry stalked her with this passage from her statement:

I have in my possession detailed accounts; evidence filled and factually based colorful presentation style addressed binders ready for release. It was hastily put together with the goal of further weakening Marion’s credibility in an attempt to strengthen mine. After consulting with my family and concerned friends, I’ve now decided this isn’t the battle to choose. My primary focus is on my health, my finances, and most importantly the sanity and safety of my girls.

So maybe he did stalk her, but she’s not going to pursue it? Then what of this statement, which she gave to the City Paper: “He does not stalk,” she says. “He does what I allow him to do.” It’s all a little murky, to say the least.

Beyond even that though, the D.C. Criminal Code offers some guidance on whether the stalking charges, which by all accounts stemmed from a traffic stop during which Barry may or may not have been following Watts-Brighthaupt and her husband, would hold up. From DC ST § 22-404 (emphasis ours):

(b) Any person who on more than one occasion engages in conduct with the intent to cause emotional distress to another person or places another person in reasonable fear of death or bodily injury by willfully, maliciously, and repeatedly following or harassing that person, or who, without a legal purpose, willfully, maliciously, and repeatedly follows or harasses another person, is guilty of the crime of stalking and shall be fined not more than $500 or be imprisoned not more than 12 months, or both. Constitutionally protected activity, such as conduct by a party to a labor dispute in furtherance of labor or management objectives in that dispute, is not included within the meaning of this definition.

The highlighted sections show that in order for a prosecutor to pursue stalking charges, there would have to be evidence that Barry had done something like this to Watts-Brighthaupt more than once. Some emails uncovered by City Desk reveal that Barry and Watts-Brighthaupt’s relationship was evidently rocky (he allegedly threw her out of his Denver hotel room and canceled her plane ticket? That’s just mean!), but unless she changes her mind and decides to provide prosecutors with those binders she claims to have, or some kind of an account of multiple incidents of stalking behavior, this one ain’t likely to stick.