8 Nov 20th-Nov 26th, 2025 phoenixnewtimes.com PHOENIX NEW TIMES | NEWS | FEATURE | FOOD & DRINK | ARTS & CULTURE | MUSIC | CONCERTS | CANNABIS | Apparently easily spooked, Stout filed an injunction against harassment on Gagic in August 2024, which was served to Gagic at his home by three Maricopa County Sheriff’s deputies and an FBI agent. The agent told Gagic the injunction had come from Mitchell’s office and that he could be charged with cyberstalking if he kept tweeting. Gagic challenged the injunction in court, where Stout took the stand and admitted he used his X sock puppets, @AZJayPaul and @AZ1Patriot, to battle Gagic. Stout, who was represented by three lawyers from a firm that does business with the county, copped to being Mitchell’s fiancé and testified that Mitchell had helped draft his injunction petition. Gagic represented himself and questioned Stout, the only time the pair had ever actually spoken to each other. Both men had flung insults at each other on X — Stout needling Gagic over a suspen- sion from the State Bar of Arizona, and Gagic calling Stout a “psycho” and incorrectly suggesting that he might be a different Paul Stout convicted of a sex crime in Texas. Despite that, Maricopa County Commissioner Richard Albrecht upheld the injunction, ruling that it did not violate Gagic’s free speech rights. Albrecht found that Gagic’s posts would cause a reasonable person “to be seriously alarmed, annoyed or harassed,” which is the rather subjective definition of “harassment” under Arizona law. Albrecht wrote that Gagic was allowed to “comment civilly” on Stout’s “ideas” but that Gagic could not post personal attacks that “do not convey a message of public interest or which contain lewd, profane or obscene remarks.” Gagic appealed Albrecht’s ruling and continued to post about Stout and Mitchell, but his appeal was denied by the Arizona Court of Appeals in July. Gagic had argued that “Stout is acting as a proxy to his fiancé, the Maricopa County Attorney,” the court noted, but it ultimately found that the initial injunction was not “substantially motivated by a desire to deter, retaliate against or prevent the lawful exercise of a constitu- tional right.” And yet, Stout’s own 2024 petition for the injunction notes that the entire row began when “Gagic began posting personal nega- tive comments about my fiancée, the county attorney, on X.” Stout has since repeatedly complained to the Phoenix police about Gagic’s postings and even went so far as to call the cops when a New Times reporter phoned him to ask him for comment on the saga. For her part, the county attorney seems preoccupied by Gagic. Though Gagic still cannot practice law as a result of a 2023 bar suspension, Mitchell asked for Gagic’s disbarment in 2024, citing nasty comments he made about Stout and the fact that “Gagic has been criticizing me for months on X.” And when someone anon- ymously sent Mitchell some alleged animal poop in the mail, Mitchell called the cops and suggested two possible suspects: Gagic and pro-Palestinian demonstrators at Arizona State University. Big Sis? No doubt many of Gagic’s posts are obnoxious, inaccurate and, in some cases, could be considered potentially defamatory. But an Orwellian warrant that could involve anyone who “liked” one of Gagic’s posts seems like overkill. Veteran Phoenix defense attorney Jack Litwak, who has handled injunctions against harassment out the proverbial wazoo, pointed out that even if Gagic did commit a crime, it’s likely a low-level offense that a state attorney general usually doesn’t bother with. He said violating an injunction against harassment could be charged as “interfering with judicial proceedings,” a class 1 misde- meanor punishable by up to 6 months in jail. Another possibility could be the use of an electronic communication device to “terrify, intimidate, threaten or harass,” also a class 1 misdemeanor. Notably, in Gagic’s case, the only thing close to a threat was when Gagic challenged an X account — that Stout said didn’t even belong to him — to meet up somewhere for fisticuffs. Asked if he thought the Attorney General’s office would bother itself with a misdemeanor charge, Litwak was unsure. “I don’t typically see that without a felony charge,” he said, “but they will charge misdemeanors associated with felonies.” A copy of the affidavit for the warrant subsequently obtained by New Times states that the Attorney General’s office is investi- gating Gagic for “aggravated harassment” under ARS 13-2921.01, which can be prose- cuted as a class 5 or 6 felony, punishable by 6 months to 2.5 years in prison. Gagic said he was alarmed by the warrant. Its attempt to track his direct messages on X reminded him of communist Yugoslavia, which his parents fled in the 1970s before bringing him to the United States when he was 5. “Why does the county’s chief prosecutor, the FBI and the attorney general who’s suing Trump give a shit about my Twitter account?” the former Marine wondered. He added: “And if I’m really that bad, if I’m really harassing this asshole, how come Twitter hasn’t done anything?” Gagic denied that he’d ever threatened Stout, saying, “I’m not stupid. I’m not making a threat against anybody.” Regardless, he seemed convinced that Mayes intends to imprison him over his X account, despite the fact that the original injunction against him expired in August. “They’ve already decided what they’re going to do,” he said. “They’re going to put me in jail, and there’s nothing I can do to fight it. It’s predetermined.” One possible solution would be to err on the side of caution and stop tweeting. But Gagic said he’s continued to mention Stout and Mitchell online as a kind of “insurance policy.” “They know that if they do something to me,” he said, “I’m going to do my goddamn best to put it out there.” Troll Hunting from p 6
