Rachel Mitchell’s fiancé called the cops on us for doing journalism

Hell hath no fury like Rachel Mitchell’s fiancé. Especially after a journalist calls him for a quote.

In October, Phoenix New Times reported that Paul Stout had been using burner accounts on X to attack critics of Mitchell, his fianceé and the current Maricopa County attorney. One of those critics was Vladimir Gagic, a suspended attorney and a vociferous tweeter against whom Stout sought a protective order.

Stout admitted to his use of the burner accounts — and his relationship to Mitchell, which the county attorney has not discussed publicly — during a September hearing about the protective order. When I called Stout for a quote on the hearing, Stout apparently called the cops.

That’s how my name landed in an Oct. 27 incident report from the Phoenix Police Department. The report, which is one of several police reports and supplements involving Stout and Gagic, says the 63-year-old Stout complained that I had retweeted Gagic on X and then called Stout to ask for an interview.

New Times tried again to reach Stout for this story and again was unsuccessful. No word on whether he dialed 911.

The soap opera between Stout and Gagic has been percolating for months and seemed like an online slapfight between two random guys until late last year. That's when Stout revealed his connection to Mitchell while under oath, raising questions about the involvement of the county's top law enforcement official.

The apparent conflict of interest for Mitchell (who has been stung by one before) is obvious. When he made Gagic's tweets about Mitchell a police matter, Stout began a process that resulted in police submitting Gagic for charges to the county attorney. That would put Mitchell in the position of prosecuting Gagic — or journalists on whom Stout sics the cops — for making her fiancé uncomfortable.

Mitchell’s office did not return a call seeking comment. So far, there is no indication that Mitchell has considered filing charges against Gagic. Nor is it clear whether she has referred the case to another prosecuting authority, like another county attorney or the state Attorney General.

However, New Times has learned that she has filed a complaint with the State Bar of Arizona, which she has asked to disbar the hyper-online thorn in her side.

Police? Someone’s committing journalism

On Aug. 22, Stout was granted an injunction against Gagic that stifled what the suspended attorney could say about or to him online — and in real life, although they’ve never met. According to police records, Stout spoke to police several times in August, September and October to allege that the 50-year-old Gagic repeatedly violated the protective order.

Gagic unsuccessfully challenged the injunction during a two-day hearing in September before Maricopa County Commissioner Richard Albrecht. The commissioner sided with Stout, finding that Gagic’s insulting and sometimes vulgar posts were not protected by the First Amendment.

During the hearing, Stout admitted under oath to using burner accounts on X to do battle with Gagic. New Times later reported that these same burner accounts were used to take swipes at Mitchell’s political rivals, her critics and Valley journalists, including New Times news editor Zach Buchanan.

For the initial story on the feud, I called Stout to ask for comment. This is standard journalistic practice. Stout did not answer nor return the call. According to the police report, Stout instead contacted police, telling an officer that I had left a voicemail saying he wanted “to interview him for a story,” per the report.

The police have never contacted me, though the report identifies me as a “suspicious individual.”

Stout said the phone call came not long after I had retweeted an Oct. 27 post that mentioned Stout’s name. “The original Tweet was posted by Vladimir Gagic,” the report reads. It appears the post in question is a retweet of Gina Godbehere, Mitchell's challenger in the 2024 Republican primary. Godbehere was commenting on a May post from @AZ1Patriot, a now-defunct account that was later revealed to be one of Stout’s burners.

The @AZ1Patriot post had responded to a Mother’s Day message from Godbehere criticizing her “overly too-tight shirt.” Gagic quote-tweeted Stout’s comment in September, calling it “sexist.” Godbehere then quote-tweeted Gagic, noting that she’d learned the original “creepy response” had come from Stout. Godbehere tagged Mitchell in the post.

I retweeted Godbehere’s missive on Oct. 27, the same day Stout called the police to report an act of journalism.

A conflict of interest

During the hearing before Albrecht in September, Stout testified that Mitchell helped him write the petition for an injunction against Gagic. Mitchell, also listed as a possible witness on Stout’s behalf, was a no-show at the hearing.

According to the police reports, Stout told investigators that Mitchell had “a conversation with the assistant chief” of police about Gagic, prompting police to open a case against the suspended attorney. Stout also told police the matter had been reported to the FBI and that “he and Rachel” would be interviewed by the FBI because “the FBI felt there was cyberstalking.”

According to court records, Gagic was served with the injunction against harassment by FBI agent Wyatt Storm, who was accompanied by deputies from the Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office. In body cam footage from the sheriff’s office posted online by Gagic, Storm tells Gagic that the injunction was sent to the FBI by Mitchell’s office.

The FBI's Phoenix office did not reply to an inquiry from New Times about whether it is investigating Gagic.

Gagic’s criticism of Stout online certainly wasn’t tame. The Phoenix police report describes posts in which Gagic calls Stout “a total pussy” and a “fucking loser,” among other things, and challenges the former shoe salesman and retired state worker to “confront me like a man you fucking dipshit.” Gagic also called Albrecht a “fucking commie.”

At least one police officer seemed skeptical that Stout or Mitchell faced danger from Gagic. The officer wrote that Stout “did not provide specific examples or elements of specific threats made toward him.” Still, the police reports state the case was "submitted to the Maricopa County Attorney’s Office for review” for possible prosecution of Gagic on charges of “aggravated harassment,” a class 6 felony.

Mitchell’s office did not reply to a request for comment on the possible conflict of interest inherent in deciding whether to prosecute a case wherein Mitchell’s fiancé is the alleged victim.

Gagic believes Stout is pursuing a criminal case against him so that a conviction can be used in a lawsuit for financial gain. According to the police reports, Stout told an officer that Gagic’s accusations against him “would be a civil lawsuit for him eventually.”

“The facts proven in a criminal case are automatically proven in a civil case,” Gagic told New Times. “It carries over automatically. I don’t get to contest it.”

A bar complaint

Two years ago, the State Bar suspended Gagic’s law license for a year. The punishment was levied after Gagic criticized and made accusations against judges assigned to the criminal case of Jamaal Pennington, a Phoenix resident whom Gagic had defended against charges of child molestation and sex trafficking. The bar also hit Gagic with a $6,000 fine, which he has not paid.

Hypothetically, Gagic could pay the fine and seek reinstatement, though he’d have to show he’s been rehabilitated. His persistent criticism of the State Bar would make this a tall order. Mitchell has sought to make it insurmountable.

According to correspondence between the State Bar and Gagic obtained by New Times, Mitchell lodged a separate bar complaint against Gagic in July. In her complaint, Mitchell identified herself as “the elected Maricopa County Attorney” and complained that Gagic “has been repeatedly criticizing me on X” and now “he is defaming my fiancé.” Mitchell cited a post in which Gagic asked if Stout is a convicted sex offender, though Gagic now concedes he had found the criminal history of the wrong Paul Stout.

“My fiancé has no such record,” Mitchell wrote. She added that even though Gagic remains suspended, “this is so beyond the pale — he needs to be disbarred.”

The State Bar informed Gagic on Oct. 15 that he was under investigation regarding the complaint. A spokesperson for the bar declined to comment to New Times.

Gagic is appealing Albrecht’s decision upholding Stout’s injunction. The appeal is stalled because Albrecht did not sign his order and “unsigned rulings are not appealable," according to an appeals court response sent to Gagic. The appeals court has stayed Gagic’s appeal until Jan. 22 or until Albrecht issues a signed order, whichever comes first.

(Ironically, the Pennington case, which sparked Gagic’s issues with the State Bar and prompted Stout to engage with Gagic online, was recently overturned in part by the court of appeals because the prosecutor “misstated evidence” to the jury.)

Gagic said he’s not holding his breath that any of this will work out in his favor.

“If I’m not a lawyer ever again, that's OK,” he said. “Because my dream job is selling power tools at Home Depot.”