St. Paul Man Pleads Guilty to Harassing Mayor Kaohly

A St. Paul man has pleaded guilty to a gross misdemeanor charge of harassment after admitting he posted threatening videos targeting Kaohly Her, who was serving in the Minnesota House of Representatives at the time.

Pao Her Lee’s plea, entered ahead of his scheduled December 14 sentencing, marks the latest legal development following a period of intense political violence in Minnesota.

According to a criminal complaint, the videos were uploaded on June 14, 2025, just hours after a gunman attacked the homes of state representatives, including the assassination of Melissa Hortman and the shooting of Senator John Hoffman. The videos, which Her reported to House authorities last July, were described by the mayor as an apparent “call of action to kill her.”

The content of the videos went beyond simple criticism. The narrator specifically referenced the attacks on Hortman and Hoffman, using the violence as a backdrop to excoriate Democratic lawmakers for their stances on abortion and their supposed role in endangering the Asian community. For public officials, these threats transformed digital spaces into a source of tangible, daily fear.

Her, now the mayor of St. Paul, expressed the chilling effect such rhetoric had on her personal life. The complaint notes that she felt “concerned for herself and terrified for her family,” to the point where mundane occurrences—a delivery package, an open gate, or a passing car—triggered genuine alarm.

As reported by CBS News, Her confirmed that she did not know Lee personally, showing how arbitrary the targeting was.

The investigation into Lee’s actions spanned several months. When law enforcement first interviewed him in July 2025, Lee denied any involvement with the videos. However, during a follow-up interview in December, his stance shifted. He eventually admitted to posting the content, though he attempted to minimize his actions by claiming he had no intention of harming the then-representative.

Lee described his behavior as a misguided attempt at humor, telling investigators he was acting as a blogger and felt the posts were “not serious and meant nothing.” His defense hinged on the idea that the timing—linking his content to the actual shootings of public officials—was merely a byproduct of his work.

Under the terms of his plea agreement, if the court accepts the deal at his December sentencing, a separate harassment charge and a felony count of threats of violence will be dismissed.

The incident highlights a volatile period for Minnesota politics, where the line between protected speech and criminal intimidation has become increasingly blurred. The Minnesota House of Representatives, like many legislative bodies across the country, has faced mounting pressure to balance open accessibility with the physical safety of its members.

The reality remains that for those in office, digital threats are rarely seen as abstract; they are viewed as precursors to real-world harm.

While the legal process moves toward its conclusion, the emotional toll on the targeted official remains a quiet, persistent consequence of the harassment. Her’s office declined to comment on the plea, leaving the focus on the judicial outcome. As the sentencing date approaches, the case shows how quickly digital vitriol can infiltrate the private lives of public servants, leaving them to question the safety of their own doorsteps.