6 Nov 20th-Nov 26th, 2025 phoenixnewtimes.com PHOENIX NEW TIMES | NEWS | FEATURE | FOOD & DRINK | ARTS & CULTURE | MUSIC | CONCERTS | CANNABIS | Troll Hunting Mayes investigating Maricopa County Attorney’s No. 1 internet critic. BY STEPHEN LEMONS K ris Mayes and Rachel Mitchell aren’t exactly pals. Last year, they traded barbed letters over who has the authority to seek death warrants for state executions. Mitchell, the centrist Republican prosecutor for Maricopa County, accused Mayes of not killing prisoners fast enough. Mayes, the Democratic state attorney general, essen- tially told Mitchell to stay in her lane. But when it comes to policing the social media output of a particularly cranky critic of Mitchell’s, it would appear they’re happy to play nice. In the last few weeks, Mayes has injected her office into a bitter online feud between former Phoenix attorney Vladimir Gagic and Mitchell’s fiancé, Paul Stout. Gagic and Stout had waged a keyboard war for months on the social media site X, with Gagic blasting Mitchell and Stout counter- attacking to defend her, albeit under two burner accounts. The feud resulted in Gagic being hit with a protective order limiting what he can tweet about Mitchell’s main squeeze. The attorney general is now investi- gating whether Gagic violated that order, which technically expired in August. Mayes’ spokesperson Richie Taylor told Phoenix New Times that the warrant origi- nated from Mayes’ office, which was sent the case by the Phoenix Police Department “because of the conflicts at the Maricopa County Attorney’s Office.” New Times asked Mitchell’s office for a comment on the warrant, but has yet to receive a reply. Arizona Attorney General Kris Mayes (left) and Maricopa County Attorney Rachel Mitchell (right). (TJ L’Heureux and Katya Schwenk) Given that the case involves dispeptic tweets, the information Mayes’ office seeks is particularly wide-ranging. State investiga- tors obtained a broad warrant that they sent to the social media site X, seeking a mother- lode of data on Gagic’s account @toxikvlad. X’s legal department emailed a copy of the warrant to Gagic on Nov. 6, and Gagic shared it with New Times. Signed by a judge on Oct. 30, it asks X for pretty much everything to do with Gagic’s account, including the times he logged in, his posts, all direct messages received and sent by him, a list of his 861 followers, all users who have liked or reposted his posts, “all location data associated with the account,” all data he deleted, a list of everyone he unfollowed or blocked and all X searches performed by him. Asked about the breadth of the warrant and the possible First Amendment implica- tions, Taylor pointed out that the order limiting Gagic’s online comments about Mitchell’s fiancé was upheld by the Arizona Court of Appeals. (Mitchell described Stout as her husband in one Phoenix police report, but has previously declined to comment on the couple’s status.) “The Attorney General’s Office takes seriously allegations of harassment against family members of elected officials,” Taylor said. According to the public record of the case, however, the “harassment” at issue would seem to barely fit the term. It involves no direct contact between Stout and Gagic, nor any real threat of violence. Mostly, it was a pissing match between two grown men. Gagic on the brain New Times first reported on the internet melee between Stout and Gagic in 2024. That year, Stout admitted on the stand during a hearing over the protective order that he used burner accounts on X, taking swipes at local journalists, politicians and Gina Godbehere, who challenged Mitchell in the Republican primary for county attorney. During his incognito run on X, Stout sniped at Gagic, who had criticized how Mitchell handled a sex trafficking case he’d worked as a defense attorney. Gagic returned fire and then some, calling Stout out by his real name. >> p 8 | NEWS |
