Ramsey County Sheriff's Office
The agency that couldn't serve an HRO but successfully leaked Plaintiff's address - a rare 0% success, 200% harm scenario.
Key Context
- Ramsey County Sheriff's Office is responsible for civil order service in the Second Judicial District.
- Served an unsigned December 12, 2023 HRO without notifying the protected party.
- Disclosed protected address after calling to notify Plaintiff of an active harassment risk.
- Confirmed service to the court without confirming receipt by the Plaintiff.
Why It Matters
Protective orders are only as effective as the systems that enforce them. When law enforcement fails to notify one party, while enabling the other with sensitive information, the result isn't protection - it's asymmetrical harm.
The Ramsey County Sheriff's Office not only disclosed my private address to an adverse party but then failed to inform me of a court order served in my name. That lapse allowed the other party to weaponize a legal document I hadn't even seen.
At issue isn't just one order - it's the assumption of institutional competence. This case challenges that assumption. And it exposes how procedural gaps become conduits for harm.
Protective Custody, Reversed
When law enforcement calls to notify you of a stalker's threats, you expect that the next call won't be from the stalker - holding your address.
On February 3, 2023, the Ramsey County Sheriff's Office contacted me regarding digital harassment and escalating behavior by an individual they identified as a threat. I cooperated. I confirmed my contact information and provided my address - voluntarily - under the assumption that I was being protected.
Days later, the same individual sent physical mail to both my residence and my husband's workplace. My information had been disclosed - not by a data breach, but by the very agency that had warned me.
Service Without Notification
The breach of trust was not limited to disclosure. On December 12, 2023, an unsigned Harassment Restraining Order (HRO) was issued. The Sheriff's Office would later serve this document - retroactively - while failing to notify me of its existence for over two months.
I asked repeatedly: had any order been served? I was told no. I said explicitly: I have not received anything in the mail. The office insisted nothing had been processed.
Service confirmed, notice denied. Protective orders only matter when both parties know they exist.
The result? My stalker acted with knowledge I didn't have - writing, mailing, and weaponizing a document I had never seen. The Sheriff's Office, meanwhile, served the order and documented the service - without ever telling me.
Enforcement in Reverse
An agency tasked with preventing harm instead enabled it - not by intent, but by inaction and miscommunication.
The handling of this HRO created a procedural blind spot in which the protected party was the last to be informed. The responding agency became the point of exposure. And the system mistook filing for fairness.
Whether by oversight, misfiled records, or a failure in basic follow-up protocol, the Sheriff's Office undermined its own role. It offered service, not safety. Procedure, not protection.
You can't serve justice if you forget who it's for.