Rachel Shaver Snitched on Entitled House Party in Seattle

Rat No. 23479 - 4 Comments
Posted On:
By: StayHome
Category: Cop Callers
Last Known Other Address:
1009 W Garfield St.
Washington Data Dump File 2:

"1009 was recently sold to new owners. Since then, I have seen this household violate orders 4 times in a short amount of time, with today's festivities including at least 4 different families at their home during the day, and then about 5 other different families at their home this evening. They are hosting a full party today, with the windows all open for everyone to see and hear. This kind of thing has to stop. Please send them a notice or a warning. They think the rules do not apply to them." - Rachel Shaver

The aforementioned complaint was filed by Rachel Shaver in Seattle, Washington on Saturday May 2, 2020 with Law Enforcement against Entitled House Party saying, Large gathering(s) of people. Email address given was rashaver1@gmail.com and phone number given was 3074136943.

Here is the latest example from this person: "Don't worry, I sent all of this over to your parole officer today." This statement like the others proves that her name belongs in the snitch section of this website.



We have said before that people need to be warned about snitches so that they can conduct themselves accordingly. Her neighbors need to know that she is the kind of person that won't mind her own business and run her mouth about them to the COVID snitching form. People she interacts with online need to know that if she does not get her way that she has a history of trying to cause problems for people with the government. A heads up about such things could save people problems in the future.

This lady is really something. She complains admitting she snitched on her neighbors and claims to have started snitching on this website for not removing the snitch report that she admits is true. This is typical snitch stuff. If you don't do what they want they just gripe and gripe to the government. That might work with websites that don't know better, but not this one. Some of her statements included:


"I see you keep posting articles about me and skewing them to your narrative ... What you're doing is illegal. The Washington State attorney general and the Oregon state attorney general have complaints filed." - Rachel


The problem with her position is that publishing accurate publicly available information is not illegal.

Her arguments bring up an interesting point, saying among other things:


"Like I mentioned before, I get what you're doing and I support defunding the police, BUT I DID NOT CALL THE POLICE in this situation. I reported this on a covid hotline. I took the very action your mission would have hoped-- not calling the police. What gives?"


That conduct is the same as calling the police. A good analogy would be asking someone to complain to the cops on your behalf. Whenever an illegality is reported to the government the reporter is a snitch. Saying that they used a proxy setup by the state instead of complaining to the police department directly is not a valid defense to a charge of snitching. It is like sending a tip to crime stoppers.

This subject admitted making the above statement in an email to us from the same email address listed above. When we refused to take this down she threatened us with legal action and claimed to have filed a complaint with the FTC regarding our refusal. So, basically her response to being exposed as a snitch is to admit being a snitch and claiming to snitch again. Typical of a lot of snitches including the ones complaining about our use of the Coronavirus snitch list that was originally published by another website as explained at https://copblaster.com/coronavirus/

Login to Comment using a Snitch Tracker Account.


Register if you don't have a Snitch Tracker account.