Who is Matthew Ammel? One of the Bodyguards Ex-Senator Kyrsten Sinema Allegedly Had Sexual Relations With

Matthew Ammel has become the focus of national attention after a lawsuit alleged he had an inappropriate relationship with Kyrsten Sinema while working as part of her security detail.

The claims, filed by Ammel's estranged wife, have sparked scrutiny not only because of the individuals involved, but also due to the unusual legal grounds under which the case has been brought.

Why Matthew Ammel Is in the Spotlight

The case emerged from a civil complaint filed in North Carolina, where the plaintiff alleges that Sinema interfered in her marriage by engaging in a romantic and sexual relationship with Ammel.

The lawsuit has propelled Ammel, previously unknown to the public, into the headlines as details of his background and professional role have been examined.

The allegations remain unproven, and no court has made findings of fact. At the time of writing, neither Ammel nor Sinema has publicly commented on the claims.

READ MORE: Kyrsten Sinema's Ex-Security Head Quit After Revealing She Had Sexual Relations With Bodyguards, Lawsuit Claims

Matthew Ammel's Military Background

Court filings describe Ammel as a US Army veteran who served overseas before transitioning into private security work.

Documents reference that he experienced post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and traumatic brain injuries (TBI) linked to his military service. These details have been cited as part of the broader context of his life following deployment and his subsequent employment in political security.

After leaving the military, Ammel pursued work in protective services, a path that ultimately led him to a role supporting a high-profile political figure.

Family Life and Marriage

Ammel was married to Heather Ammel for approximately 14 years, and the couple share three children.

According to the complaint, their marriage deteriorated during the period when Ammel was working closely with Sinema.

The filing alleges that the relationship between Ammel and the former senator coincided with increased marital strain, eventually leading to separation.

The lawsuit frames these events as central to the claim that the marriage was damaged by outside interference.

Role on Kyrsten Sinema's Security Team

Ammel joined Sinema's security detail in 2022 while she was serving as a US senator. His duties reportedly involved close-protection work and accompanying her on domestic and international travel.

The complaint alleges that Ammel's role brought him into frequent and private contact with Sinema, creating circumstances in which professional boundaries were crossed.

Court documents further claim that Ammel later held a paid position linked to Sinema's political operation, though his primary responsibilities remained tied to security and travel.

Allegations Detailed in the Lawsuit

The lawsuit alleges that Sinema and Ammel exchanged intimate messages using encrypted communication platforms and that their interactions went beyond a professional relationship. Claims also reference invitations to concerts and events, as well as the exchange of personal gifts.

These allegations form the basis of the plaintiff's assertion that a romantic and sexual relationship existed.

All such claims are allegations contained within a civil filing and have not been tested in court.

Legal Context of the Case

The lawsuit was filed under North Carolina's alienation of affection law, a rarely used legal doctrine that allows a spouse to seek damages from a third party accused of damaging a marriage.

The plaintiff is seeking monetary damages for emotional distress and the alleged breakdown of the marital relationship.

Legal experts note that such cases are uncommon, adding to the public interest surrounding the dispute.

Public Reaction and Current Status

The allegations have drawn widespread media coverage and online discussion due to Sinema's prominence and Ammel's previously private life.

As the case proceeds, attention remains focused on court filings rather than public statements, with both parties maintaining silence while the legal process unfolds.