Rachel Shaver of Seattle, Washington Snitched on Cop Blaster

Blast Zone No. 26013 - 0 Comments
Set Up On:
Category: Snitches - Cop Callers
Last Known Home Address:
Rachel Shaver's Snitch Paperwork:

When we parsed the Washington Coronavirus Snitch List into individual posts on this website we knew that we would get a lot of complaints. That is because by parsing those complaints into individual posts in that fashion we did something that the source of the original leaked data never did. We made the snitch list search engine friendly. We have gotten a lot of traffic and of course complaints as a result. The complaints come in a variety of forms, but this latest one is the first to result in snitch paperwork about the person complaining to us that by itself warrants an independent snitch report on this website.

Rachel Shaver of Seattle, Washington became known to us in early September after she sent us a series of emails demanding that her snitch report be removed. Most people try to argue that the snitch report about them is not accurate in some way, but not her. Shaver used the approach of challenging the practice of publishing publicly available information that is both true and accurate on other grounds. Her argument was basically that although she had ratted out her neighbors as documented by the report that we did not have the right to publish some of the information in the report. As people that know our rights we knew that she was wrong about that, so we refused to remove or redact anything at all. That did not sit well with her and like a lot of snitches, her response was to threaten us with more snitching. Think about this for a second, a person arguing that their information should not be on a snitch list threatens to snitch on people as part of that argument if their information is not removed from the snitch list. That qualifies such people as snitches whose behavior needs to be known to those around them.

Over a month after our last correspondence with Shaver we received a letter from Christopher Kiefer at the Washington Attorney General's Office saying that his office had received a consumer complaint about our business. His letter was followed by a full unredacted copy of that complaint including all contact information for the person that filed the complaint. That person was Rachel Shaver. We have criticized consumer protection agencies in other states before for failing to protect consumers by turning over their personal contact information to people and businesses that they receive complaints about (https://copblaster.com/blast/3256/odoj-policy-of-sending-subject-of-complaints-all-info-is-an-oxymoron). Mr. Kiefer's letter shows that agencies such as his have not learned their lesson. They continue to sent home addresses of their snitches to the subjects of their complaints regardless of who they are. Even when they complain about a business that was founded by a convicted felon after spending time in a federal penitentiary for a violent crime (violation of 18 U.S.C. 111(b)) they still send everything anyone would need to find and potentially silence forever the person asking them for help. We have no intention of harming Ms. Shaver physically or harming her property in any way, but that is besides the point. The point is that if we wanted her dead we could easily make that happen using the information given to us by a self described "Consumer Protection Specialist." Part of what we do at Cop Blaster is expose government hypocrisy and government agencies that act contrary to their stated purposes. When a "Consumer Protection Division" fails to protect a consumer by giving people like us everything we would need if we ever felt like reaching out to violent gangsters that we know in Ms. Shaver's area then they are failing protect consumers.

The State of Washington consumer complaint form contains the following information:

"Your Complaint will become a public record. For this reason, please do not include sensitive personal information." https://fortress.wa.gov/atg/formhandler/ago/ComplaintForm.aspx

That warning does not make it clear enough that we would receive her contact information as a direct result of her complaint in our opinion. It did put her on notice that a public record was being created, but we think most reasonable people in her position would think that an extra request would be required on our end to get her contact information. For that reason we are willing to remove her addresses, email address, and phone numbers from this website if the state of Washington updates their form with a clear warning in big red letters stating something to the effect of "BY AUTHORIZING THE STATE OF WASHINGTON TO CONTACT THE SUBJECT OF THIS COMPLAINT YOU UNDERSTAND THAT THE SUBJECT WILL RECEIVE ALL INFORMATION THAT YOU PROVIDE INCLUDING YOUR PHYSICAL ADDRESS, EMAIL ADDRESS, AND PHONE NUMBER" and gives CopBlaster.com appropriate public credit for the change. We will consider the public credit appropriate if that credit includes a press release issued by the Washington Attorney General's Office, CopBlaster.com is mentioned by name in the release, the release contains a link in the form of an anchor element with an href attribute containing the URL https://copblaster.com/ with the anchor text "Report Police Misconduct" that does not feature any rel or target attributes, and the page hosting the release is available to search engines. That last part means that the wa.gov site cannot contain any robots.txt directives, meta tags, or other features capable of blocking bots from the page or directing them not to include the page in their search results.

Back to the consumer that the state of Washington is failing to protect. Rachel Shaver filed the following complaint with the State of Washington:

"I live in the state of Washington, and while complying with WA state orders to stay home during the global pandemic, I reported a massive house party next door to me in the month of May. Since then, an e-commerce website, Copblaster.com, that sells T-shirts, has published this report and my personal information including home address, email and phone number, with intention to put myself in harms way and cause damage to my reputation. While the webmaster claims this information is public record, my personal information is not. I have gone back and forth several times with this person asking them to remove my information. Because I was complying with a state order, it seems the state should be able to assist in removing this information. Tens of thousands of people have had their personal information exposed, and some of them have indeed suffered violence and vandalism from having their addresses published. Please help shut this activity down; it is dangerous and illegal."

There are some truths to Ms. Shaver's complaint. She did rat out her neighbors to Governor Inslee's stay at home violation reporting form and we did publish a post containing her complaint along with the contact information that she herself submitted to the state via that form. She has also gone back and forth with us trying to get it removed. We posted some of that back and forth in the comments section of the original report (linked to above this article). That back and forth convinced us that she is the type of person that people need to be warned about because she ratted on her neighbors and was threatening to rat on us. Knowing that she's a rat could save future neighbors, friends, co-workers, and others that interact with her a lot of trouble if they keep that in mind when deciding what activities of theirs she is allowed to see. That is the underlying purpose of tracking snitches on this website. We provide a service capable of denying snitches the opportunity to snitch by informing those around them of the liability they present.

Ms. Shaver also included several claims that are not true. We do not and have never sold t-shirts on CopBlaster.com, we did not post the Coronavirus Snitch List for the purpose of putting people in harms way, and any damage to her reputation caused by this is of her own doing. People often try to use such arguments to get around the simple fact that posting truthful information is always a defense to claims of defamation. When they realize that they cannot get a post removed by attacking its accuracy then they look for other things. Things like trying to argue that addresses posted are posted to cause physical harm. There is zero evidence to support her claim. She simply sees her address and argues that it is posted to cause her physical harm without any proof. The truth is that addresses help people identify the subjects they are reading about and locations they are likely to encounter them. Identifying them is key to figuring out if you know them. She's also wrong in asserting that her personal information is not publicly available.

Why Not Redact Personal Information?

The more information we can provide the easier it is for our readers to figure out what threat if any that a person poses to them. That is why we included the contact fields from the Coronavirus Snitch List (https://copblaster.com/coronavirus/). Now that over 10,000 posts contain that type of information we could not simply go back and block it out even if we wanted to. That is why we will never make exceptions for people claiming that such information presents some atypical danger in their specific case. That would require us to potentially dedicate countless hours to redacting information that otherwise requires not time to manage. Ms. Shaver is right that this website is a commercial entity. It would not make sense for any commercial operation to allocate resources to activities that do not require any resources at all unless they are being paid to do so and since we do not offer paid removal services on this site it does not make sense to allocate time or resources to such things at this time. We are nice enough to send brief explanations to people complaining about why their information is on the site as time permits event though it is an unnecessary courtesy, but technically we are under no obligation to respond to them at all let alone work with them. It just would not be economically viable to investigate such claims and it certainly would not be viable to go through each post and censor information. For that reason we will not consider removing her personal information because if we did it for her we would have to do it for others and that would just not be a productive use of our time.

What is Publicly Available Information?

A lot of people do not realize that most of their information is publicly available. In Ms. Shaver's case we were able to find a public record containing the following information about her:


Sex: Female

Age: 36

Address History:



2013 - Now



2008 - 2016

PO BOX 14953


2008 - 2015

7511 E 19TH AVE

DENVER, CO 80220

2013 - 2014


DENVER, CO 80218

2013 - 2014


CARY, NC 27513

2007 - 2012



2001 - 2008

Phone Numbers:




Email Addresses:


Criminal Records:

Case Number: 01170CATAWBA2003CR010049

Case Type: CR

Crime County: CATAWBA

Offense Description: UNSPECIFIED

Charges Filed Date: 08/07/2003


Case Number: 01170CATAWBA 2003CR 010049



Crime County: CATAWBA

Offense Code: 20-141(J1)

Offense Date: 07/31/2003

Offense Description: CONVICT:SPEEDING 084/65

Charges Filed Date: 07/31/2003





Disposition Date: 09/08/2003

Court Costs: 10

Case Number: 01910WAKE 2006CR 728353


Crime County: WAKE

Offense Code: 20-141(B)(G)

Offense Date: 11/04/2006

Offense Description: CONVICT:SPEEDING 074/65

Charges Filed Date: 11/04/2006

Court: WAKE




Disposition Date: 11/28/2006

Court Costs: 11

Fines: 10

Case Number: 1702003010049CR

Crime County: CATAWBA

Offense Code: CITATION

NO: 2128835

Offense Description

Charges Filed Date: 08/07/2003


Case Number: 9102006728353CR


Crime County: WAKE

Offense Code: CITATION

NO: E748246

Offense Description: NOT SPECIFIED

Charges Filed Date: 11/06/2006

Court: WAKE

Additional records list her relatives, neighbors, and voter registration history, but as a courtesy for innocent people we are not naming her relatives or neighbors. Her voter registration is quite interesting since it appears that she was a registered Republican originally but switched to the other side in 2008 and is now a registered Democrat. All of the above information is from the same source. We simply subscribed to a background check website and typed in her name before selecting the state of Washington.

She herself has made publicly available a lot of information about herself. The above image was found on one of her social media accounts. That same account contains the following information about her:

Employment History

Job Title: Chief Content Officer

Company Name: Self-employed

Dates Employed: Aug 2020-Present

Employment Duration: 3 mos

Location: Seattle, Washington, United States

Leading content strategy, production and creative consulting for multiple high-profile SaaS organizations. Creating content from the Pacific Northwest, available to clients globally.

Job Title: Director, Content Marketing

Company Name: Expedia Group

Dates Employed: Sep 2019-Aug 2020

Employment Duration: 1 yr

Location: Seattle, Washington

Leader for the global B2B content marketing and creative center of excellence for Travel Partner Group (TPG), the supply side of Expedia Group (lodging, vacation rental, air, car, activities). Responsible for bringing the partner voice to life with human-centric stories to drive brand awareness, acquisition and growth across a variety of digital channels. Managed and mentored a full-service global creative team (of 11+) for supply (lodging, vacation rental, air, cruise, car). Along with full time creative directors, copywriters, designers and project managers I also managed creative agencies and freelancers.

Job Title: Director, Content Strategy

Company Name: iCrossing

Dates Employed: Mar 2019-Sep 2019

Employment Duration: 7 mos

Location: Greater Seattle Area

Leader for regional West teams and accounts focused on content strategy and production for clients at Microsoft and T-Mobile for Business.

Job Title: Associate Creative Director, Content & Partners

Company Name: Slalom

Dates Employed: Mar 2018 Feb 2019

Employment Duration: 1 yr

Location: Greater Seattle Area

Marketing leader for content strategy and programs in partnership with Amazon Web Services, Google Cloud Platform, Salesforce, Microsoft Azure and Tableau Software.

Job Title: Content Marketing Manager

Company Name: Tableau Software

Dates Employed: Jun 2014-Mar 2018

Employment Duration: 3 yrs 10 mos

Location: Greater Seattle Area

As Tableau's first-ever content marketer, I took a high-growth marketing organization from a "random acts of content" studio to a content center of excellence by implementing integrated marketing processes and consistently aligning content strategy to pipeline goals and business initiatives.


University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill

University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill

Degree Name: BA

Field Of Study: Journalism and Mass Communication

Minor, Creative Writing

Licenses & certifications

Content Strategy - Brand Partner Program

Issuing authority: YouTube

Issued date and, if applicable, expiration date of the certification or license Issued: Dec 2016 No Expiration Date

Lithium Certified Community Manager

Issued date and, if applicable, expiration date of the certification or license Issued: Apr 2013 No Expiration Date

Volunteer Experience

All Hands Volunteers

Post-Quake Labor and Media Volunteer, Logne Haiti

Company Name: All Hands Volunteers

Dates volunteered: Jun 2010-Jul 2010

Volunteer duration: 2 mos

Cause Disaster and Humanitarian Relief

The Tableau Foundation

Marketing, Special Projects

Company Name: The Tableau Foundation

Dates volunteered: Jun 2014-Feb 2018

Volunteer duration: 3 yrs 9 mos

Open Media Foundation

Marketing Manager

Company Name: Open Media Foundation

Dates volunteered: Aug 2011-Mar 2012

Volunteer duration: 8 mos

Noticeably missing from her public records is the phone number listed in her original snitch report (3074136943), so to her credit that number probably was not publicly available before she submitted it to the state via the COVID-19 snitching form. Unfortunately, she made that number public record by submitting it to the government with a report discoverable under the Washington public records law. That is how a lot of information that used to be private becomes public record. People submit previously restricted phone numbers or addresses to government agencies and businesses when doing things like purchasing a home, obtaining a loan, paying taxes, registering to vote, or ratting out their neighbors. Then they are often blind sided when they see it turn up in public records online. The lesson to learn from this is that just because something is private today does not mean that it will remain private tomorrow. The best thing anyone can really do to prevent their information from becoming public is to be careful who they give it to and schedule a Google alert or search Google periodically for information they really do not want there like addresses or phone numbers. If they find them then they might be able to get the information removed if the site hosting the information is willing to remove it.

Do We Intent To Post Articles About Anyone That Complains to the Government About Us?

Yes we do and we always have. Anyone that knows anything about the history of this website knows that we always post articles about people that snitch on us. That is how our snitch list got started. We try to post a new and unique article on this website at least once a day. Sometimes there are plenty of newsworthy and interesting stories for us to choose from, but on slower days we have to go to Google hoping to find something interesting to write about. On those days we have no problem skipping Google and using material that we receive in the mail. We do it with threatening letters (https://copblaster.com/blast/5434/threatening-letter-received-from-russell-joseph-grover-jr) and we do it with consumer complaints from government agencies. By doing so we are able to turn the tables on such people by making their efforts to threaten, intimidate, or incite action against us beneficial for us. As a result any attempt to compromise our ability to serve our users just gives us more material. Why create a liability by responding to such things privately and inefficiently when you can create an asset by responding publicly and efficiently? We can think of no good reason to handle such things any other way.

Login to Comment using a Cop Blaster Account.


Register if you don't have a Cop Blaster account.