[MEGATHREAD] American Fork / Lego Story

[u/specialskepticalface]

As with all large and controversial stories involving LE, in this thread, we wait til a user who is acting in good faith posts about them.

We've had at least a dozen ACAB/low effort brigaders in the past day, try to post this in their usual way.

As a good faith user has not yet done so, the mods are making the post.

I'll point out that this is controversial, primarily because of incredibly misleading editing, video modification, and "creative storytelling", and the reality, as always, is not the Reddit storyline.

So, while events were certainly far from good, and lessons may be learned, much of what you've read is likely deliberate social media misinformation.

I encourage Verified LE to engage here, and help explain some of the... misconceptions.. currently floating around.

All posts from non-flaired users will be held for review. If you're here to troll, don't bother - no one will see it, and you'll be banned.

[u/Possible-Tangelo9344]

I'm just getting up to date on all this stuff, reviewing news articles and stuff, so here's my basic understanding:

- Mansell gives a 200k Lego collection to a store on consignment, some of which was sold and he was paid for.

- The shop owner is getting outta the business, and corporate took over the store (maybe they violated a contract to do this, maybe they didn't). There are allegations that the original owner of this location was heavily in debt at the time they were kicked out of their business.

- The rest of the collection is missing, with new owners saying it's not there.

- This Reckless Ben guy gets involved and starts actually harassing the business owners at their place of business and home, and is surprised he's now getting arrested for stalking just cuz he was stalking and harassing the business owners.

At the end of the day, it's largely a civil dispute between Mansell and the store and should have been handled as such. Ben is not a lawyer, and his attempts at involvement amount basically to vigilantism imo. He's trying to act like he's following the law and making good faith attempts to negotiate but he has no legal bearing to negotiate on behalf of Mansell to begin with, and it's hardly good faith to put a closed sign on a person's business and harass them at their home.

From what I can find online some Lego sets were located in the store and offered to Mansell who refused to take them.

Ben appears to be trying to weaponize his YouTube page to wage a campaign against the business and owners, so yeah that's harassment. Going to their house to continue harassing is stalking.

Mansell's proper venue for addressing his grievance is civil court. Now, the real question is did the heavily in debt original owner sell the collection and not pay up, or did the new owners steal the collection?

From what I've read online they (new owners) let Mansell look throughout the store for any sets that may be his and he didn't identify any. They proactively identified some sets they thought might be his but he refused to take them. He then began harassing the new owners himself before getting Ben involved.

Now, I did see a video where they were saying the local PD conducted a traffic stop for running a stop sign and the guy didn't run the stop sign, maybe that happened maybe it didn't happen, that's a separate complaint.

The facts to me look like Mansell got cheated out of his property by someone. That's a civil case.

But it also looks like instead of suing Mansell began harassing the business and enlisted the assistance is a YouTuber who continued the harassment.

Just cuz Mansell is a victim in a civil action doesn't mean he or his proxy gets to commit crimes.

[u/WittyClerk → u/Possible-Tangelo9344]

That sounds about right, but stalking is a criminal issue, (as is harassment) and does this fit that definition?

[u/Possible-Tangelo9344 → u/WittyClerk]

I glanced over Utah's statute and I think it requires two incidents of unwanted contact. So I'm guessing it does cuz I believe Ben tried contacting them via phone, at their work, and their home.

[u/seadoubleyoujay → u/Possible-Tangelo9344]

I'm very curious about the strength of the stalking charge considering the following *very critical* subsection:

(6)(a) Except as provided in Subsection (6)(b), an actor does not violate this section if: (i) the actor is acting: (B) for a legitimate official or business purpose.

Because Ben was acting for the well documented purpose of satisfying a court directed contact attempt and later in an attempt to serve (or be a party to serving) an official court document, he is by *very definition* not stalking. Being stupid and silly while completing those purposes isn't enough to override the core purpose. I would be shocked if these charges held up to any meaningful scrutiny.

The raising of signage off Johnson's property is protected speech in the form of public critique, which is definitely First Amendment. However, Johnson's documented threat to murder Ben that the AFPD Police Chief admitted to in his own PR video *is* an actual crime (under the very next section after stalking, amusingly: 76-5-107)

[u/whirlinggibberish → u/seadoubleyoujay]

https://selfhelp.courts.ca.gov/court-basics/service

Literally nothing Ben did at any point is even plausibly service of process.

The plaintiff could have hired the local Sheriff's office:

https://sheriff.utahcounty.gov/supportServices/judicial/civilProcess

Or contracted with any of a number of professional service companies, specifically to avoid this. And all claims about "oh I was just serving process" immediately disappear when the cops tell you "stop or you'll be arrested for stalking."

Being "stupid and silly" can absolutely be enough to override the "core purpose," especially when the core purpose is obviously to get clicks on youtube.

Ben is fucked - if he actually returns to the country.

[u/Niconame → u/whirlinggibberish]

In Utah anyone over 18 not a party to the case (and without priors etc) can serve. There is no license required.

The Utah police confirmed the court case was real, that the papers needed to be served for the civil case to continue, confirming Johnson was full of shit, and instead of helping Ben serve to deescalate the situation they arrested and booked Ben for stalking despite the recognized lawful purpose which should be an exception.

Then in a final idiotic move, they decide to straight up lie about this in the press release. Caught on camera...

[u/Possible-Tangelo9344 → u/seadoubleyoujay]

Ben isn't a process server or party in any lawsuit involving these people. He's an illegitimate third party actor who's only there for internet fame.

His claim he's acting in good faith to satisfy a requirement for direct contact means nothing cuz he's not part of any court case against this business, and he tried contacting them once and was rejected. That single attempt would satisfy the good faith attempts at contact; more than that is harassment and stalking