Standing Against Misogynistic Harassment

How can we get our water turned back on?

Based on the below is there a danger of physical violence EXPOSING THE SHERIFF From the beginning, it’s been clear that Sheriff Campbell holds deeply misogynistic views, particularly toward women who challenge his authority. The more I examine the events surrounding my husband’s case, the more I realize this isn’t really about him; it’s about me. Sheriff Campbell sees me as the problem and is using my husband as a means to punish me. It wouldn’t have been difficult for him to learn how important my husband’s support is to me—he had already contacted our previous landlord, Shawn Cabral, to obtain my husband’s employer information, a call made without a court order and solely to obtain personal information. When I initially raised concerns about his deputies’ misconduct, I chose not to approach the sheriff directly; instead, I took my complaint to Senator Bobby Hanig. I did this because I already anticipated how the sheriff would respond and wanted someone outside his reach to be aware. The senator’s office then forwarded my complaint to the sheriff, bringing it directly to his attention. From that moment on, it was clear he saw me—not just my complaint—as a problem he intended to silence. I’m not sure what lies the sheriff told the senator’s office, but whatever they were, they must have been convincing, as my continued pleas for further assistance have gone unanswered. When I spoke to Sheriff Campbell on July *, he immediately dismissed my offer of video evidence, saying, “I don’t need to see a thing from you.” His irritation was obvious as he questioned why I went to a state senator instead of approaching him directly. In his view, I had stepped out of line by involving outside authority, and he seemed determined to make me feel small for doing so. His tone wasn’t just dismissive; it carried a clear implication that he saw me as an annoyance rather than a legitimate complainant. His dismissive language, selective assignment of accountability, and reluctance to address my complaints substantively suggest that he perceives women who assert themselves as direct challenges to his authority. Throughout the call, he seemed focused not on the misconduct I was reporting but on asserting his control over me. He shifted his focus entirely from addressing my complaint to intimidating me with my husband’s warrant, stating, “We are onto bigger things now, your husband has warrants,” using the one person who, besides our children, means the most to me. It was a deliberate tactic to make me feel helpless, guilty, and ashamed. His tactics worked—I ended up apologizing to him, not because I believed I was wrong, but because he made me feel small and powerless. I could tell he relished that moment, finding satisfaction in hearing me break down under his authority. This July * call, which left me in tears and apologizing, revealed just how effective his approach was in asserting psychological dominance. He seemed to enjoy the feeling of control, the satisfaction of watching me back down and crumble under his words. This initial sense of power over me gave him something he wanted—control—and left him craving more. On July *, things escalated further. That morning, my husband and I discovered that the car illegally towed from our property on June * had been mysteriously returned, with no notification and no recorded footage of who brought it back. Shortly after, the sheriff called me again. This time, his tone was sharper, and it was clear that his focus was on reasserting his dominance. He questioned me about why my husband hadn’t turned himself in, disregarding my explanation that we were consulting a lawyer. His response was curt and dismissive: “That ain’t got nothing to do with it; he needs to come on in.” When he followed up with, “Now I have told you about these warrants, so you know, and you know what that means,” there was a slight quiver in his voice. I let out a half-giggle and replied, “Okay.” He isn’t used to someone like me, and my response angered him. It became clear this was no longer about law enforcement; it had turned into a full-fledged personal vendetta. The sheriff chose to contact my husband’s employer again, this time texting, “Just spoke to his wife. She’s a peach!!” Those were his exact words, serving no justifiable legal purpose—it was entirely personal, a dig meant to further undermine me, painting me as inconsequential and irritating. Was he hoping for camaraderie? Sheriff Campbell’s ongoing communication with my husband’s employer is not only unprofessional; it’s harassment. There’s no legitimate reason for him to continue reaching out to my husband’s employer, especially considering he holds no jurisdiction in Chowan County, where my husband is employed. Adding to the pattern, the sheriff strategically made Elizabeth Ward the complainant in my husband’s case—a decision that was anything but coincidental. Ward was one of the deputies named in my complaint to Senator Hanig, and out of all the deputies, she was chosen to initiate the complaint against my husband. This calculated move by the sheriff is difficult to ignore. By placing Ward in this role, he ensured that his retaliation would appear less obvious, using her as a buffer to obscure his own involvement. To him, Ward was simply a tool—a convenient shield against direct accusations of retaliation. This decision speaks volumes about the sheriff's approach: he used Ward as disposable collateral, assuming her role in the case would deflect attention from his true motives. He defended other deputies loudly, but remained silent about Ward, revealing his view of her as merely a pawn in his larger game of control and retribution. His actions indicate he sees her as expendable, a mere instrument in his scheme to maintain power, shield himself from accountability, and further entrench his authority. Sheriff Ray Campbell’s actions go far beyond unprofessional conduct; they expose a deeply ingrained pattern of misogyny, control, and abuse of power. From dismissing my concerns outright and refusing to review critical evidence to targeting my husband’s employer and belittling me as “a peach,” his behavior shows a deliberate and calculated attempt to intimidate, demean, and silence me for daring to challenge his authority. His retaliation escalated systematically, shifting from subtle dismissal to direct, targeted attacks on my family’s stability, revealing his intent not just to enforce the law but to exert control over a woman he deems disruptive, punishing me for not conforming to his expectations. By involving my husband’s employer and making personal, derogatory comments aimed at undermining me, he crossed a line, showing both a deep-seated bias and an intent to harm. His behavior isn’t just a misuse of his role—it’s a threat to anyone, especially women, who challenge his authority. The way he treated me underscores a sustained and dangerous misuse of power, calling for serious scrutiny as he poses a direct threat to me, my family, and anyone else he deems “out of line” in his attempts to maintain control.

How can I make people listen to me, Noone seems to see the real danger here

Is there a threat of physical harm to me