Judge orders man to stay away from city offices

Jennifer Nelson
September 11, 2008
Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

A man who had repeatedly threatened city employees is now barred from visiting South Bend governmental offices after a St. Joseph Circuit judge granted a workplace violence protective order and permanent injunction against the man.

The city of South Bend sought the protective order and permanent injunction against St. Joseph County resident Stephan Alexander Range. St. Joseph Circuit Judge Michael G. Gotsch granted the order and injunction Sept. 9; the court previously had entered a temporary restraining order against Range.

According to the court order, Range repeatedly visited city offices and disrupted the workplace and threatened employees. Range visited the city's Animal Care and Control Shelter wearing a firearm and ammunition on several occasions and had to be removed by South Bend Police. Despite being asked by city employees to not return to the shelter, Range continued going there with a firearm and ammunition.

He's prevented city employees from doing their jobs and caused several to fear for their personal safety at work and at home, according to reports. Range claims he is "chosen of God to deliver his people," compares himself to Moses, and says he may "bring desolation to an empire."

Judge Gotsch ordered Range to stay away from any city employee, to not threaten, batter, or stalk any employee, to stay out of certain city offices, such as the clerk's office, attorney's office, mayor's office, and animal shelter, and to not contact any employees at home or at work. He's only allowed to come to the city offices in person after receiving prior written permission from the Department of Law. He must also contact the city attorney by letter for non-emergency request for information. The order allows range to phone the police or fire department in the case of an actual emergency.

The order will remain in effect until Sept. 9, 2011, at which time South Bend may request renewal of the order.


Post a comment to this story

We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in Indiana Lawyer editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. This is ridiculous. Most JDs not practicing law don't know squat to justify calling themselves a lawyer. Maybe they should try visiting the inside of a courtroom before they go around calling themselves lawyers. This kind of promotional BS just increases the volume of people with JDs that are underqualified thereby dragging all the rest of us down likewise.

  2. I think it is safe to say that those Hoosier's with the most confidence in the Indiana judicial system are those Hoosier's who have never had the displeasure of dealing with the Hoosier court system.

  3. I have an open CHINS case I failed a urine screen I have since got clean completed IOP classes now in after care passed home inspection my x sister in law has my children I still don't even have unsupervised when I have been clean for over 4 months my x sister wants to keep the lids for good n has my case working with her I just discovered n have proof that at one of my hearing dcs case worker stated in court to the judge that a screen was dirty which caused me not to have unsupervised this was at the beginning two weeks after my initial screen I thought the weed could have still been in my system was upset because they were suppose to check levels n see if it was going down since this was only a few weeks after initial instead they said dirty I recently requested all of my screens from redwood because I take prescriptions that will show up n I was having my doctor look at levels to verify that matched what I was prescripted because dcs case worker accused me of abuseing when I got my screens I found out that screen I took that dcs case worker stated in court to judge that caused me to not get granted unsupervised was actually negative what can I do about this this is a serious issue saying a parent failed a screen in court to judge when they didn't please advise

  4. I have a degree at law, recent MS in regulatory studies. Licensed in KS, admitted b4 S& 7th circuit, but not to Indiana bar due to political correctness. Blacklisted, nearly unemployable due to hostile state action. Big Idea: Headwinds can overcome, esp for those not within the contours of the bell curve, the Lego Movie happiness set forth above. That said, even without the blacklisting for holding ideas unacceptable to the Glorious State, I think the idea presented above that a law degree open many vistas other than being a galley slave to elitist lawyers is pretty much laughable. (Did the law professors of Indiana pay for this to be published?)

  5. Joe, you might want to do some reading on the fate of Hoosier whistleblowers before you get your expectations raised up.