Brick-by-Brick: Unpacking the LEGO Lawsuit Scandal

What are all the legal issues in [music]. the reckless Ben Lego controversy that. has taken social media by storm? From. the lawsuits to the TTRO [music] to the. criminal charges, we're going to break. down what we need to be thinking about. because seems likely this story ain't. going anywhere anytime soon. Welcome to. Sidebar, presented by Law and Crime. I'm. Jesse Weber. Everybody loves a self-made success. [music] story, but John Morgan says that. is not how real life works. The great.

John Morgan, everybody, in his new book, Life is Luck, the founder of Morgan and. Morgan, gets real about the role that. luck plays in success and how to. recognize opportunity [music] when it. shows up. >> And that seed was just lucky. From. delivering newspapers as a kid to. building America's largest injury. [music] law firm, Morgan shares the. moments that changed everything. >> It's a how to book to approach life, luck, and ultimately success. >> This isn't another billionaire memoir.

full of [music] cheesy advice. It's. honest, blunt, and packed with lessons. on turning good luck and bad luck into. something bigger. [music] I hope people. read it. I hope people appreciate it. by. Lifeis Luck now on Amazon at. forthepeople.com/lifeisluck. The very viral and very complicated Lego. Star Wars Ben Schneider saga continues. and we have been covering it every step. of the way. But right now we're going to. do something different. We want to talk.

about the law. We want to get into a. sense of the actual legal issues that. are a part of this because that's going. to dictate everything that happens, right? both the criminal and the civil. components about this. So, the legal. issues that Ben and others are facing, but in order to do that, I got to give. you a refresher. Right? So, stay with me. on this journey. We'll go through it. This all centers around a dispute over a. reportedly highly valued Star Wars Lego. collection. Starts with Brian Mancel, whose father reportedly invested in a.

massive Lego collection that was. reportedly originally valued at over. $200,000. for his grandchildren's college. education. Although there was reporting. it's worth less than that. The. collection was placed apparently on. consignment at a bricks and mini fig. store in Salem, Oregon in 2023. Apparently the original owner of this. store was Crystal Law. We'll talk more. about her because the store would sell. the sets and then keep a commission. That's how it would work. Bricks and. Minigs corporate allegedly said this. violated the franchise rules. That law.

should not have agreed to this. 2024 the. store is apparently closed. the details. about it. They're even in dispute. According to reporting from the Salem. Business Journal, law claims that they. contacted corporate about possibly. selling the store and suddenly corporate. moved in the very same day, took it. over. But the CEO of Bricks and. Minifigs, uh, Aean McN says the owners. got a job offer overseas. They wanted to. take it, still owed hundreds of. thousands of dollars in debt. Law claims. basically corporate improperly kicked. her out, seized control over her.

business. She ended up reportedly filing. a lawsuit. Now, Menel reportedly is. like, "Tell you what, I just want my. remaining collection back that hasn't. been sold or $80,000." Now, the news. store managers, reportedly Joshua. Johnson and Brandon Best, they allegedly. said, "The Lego sets aren't here.". According to the Salem Business Journal, one year after entering this consignment. agreement with Law, Manel sends a. termination notice to Johnson saying he. hasn't been paid that month's earnings. from sales and that he hasn't been. allowed to come inspect the inventory.

And eventually they seem to offer Manel. recovered sets that are worth $2,000 to. $5,000, which Manel reportedly rejects. So Manel and his family allegedly don't. get the Legos. They don't get the money. And according to the Salt Lake Tribune, court records alleged that for months he. had filed police reports and posted. negative reviews and allegedly harassed. the new managers. That's the allegation. This is when YouTuber Reckless Ben gets. involved. Okay. earlier this year. Ben. Schneider, he's the investigative.

podcaster and he reportedly travels to. Utah where Johnson and Bess LLC is. headquartered or goes to Johnson's home. And according to Oregon Live, court. records show that in March of 2026. Apparently, Ben had tried to sue Johnson. personally, then tried suing the Bricks. and Minig store in Oregon twice in small. claims court. The first one maybe was. dismissed. Ben had tried to get a. default judgment. It gets a little. messy, but I'll tell you what, just so. you get perspective, when I interviewed. Ben Schneider, I did here on Sidebar.

Here was his take on the whole legal. situation, legal process. When was the. lawsuit filed? Did What was the first. thing that you did when you got in touch. with this family, which I believe is out. of Oregon? What was the first thing that. you guys did? >> Um, I just heard his story and then I. said, "Oh, I heard your side. Now I want. to hear their side." And so I walked. into the store and she called the cops, saw me, and said I was harassing her. And she's like, "You're harassing.". Like, all I did was I in the most polite.

way possible, I said, "Hey, I think my. friend has some Legos in your guys'. store. He asked if he could have him. back and you guys trespassed from the. store, so I'm just wondering if I can. get him back for him." And she's like, she calls the other. She's like, "I'm. being harassed right now." And she calls. 911. She's like, "Cop, I can't hear. There's a there's a lunatic here. harassing me." And uh so that's how that. went I guess. >> And and what you and when was that? Because that's different than all the. body cam that's come out into the the. you know the media the last.

>> Yeah. So in Oregon the police actually. don't wear body cams. They're not. required to in the state of Oregon. So I. was not able to get any of the body cams. for Oregon sadly. But that was the very. end. It was like one of the last days of. September, probably like September 29th. I'd say and of 2020. And um yeah, so that's when the whole. thing started, I guess. >> When did the lawsuit get filed? >> The first one. So we actually did one.

lawsuit and then they ended up closing. down the whole store. So that ended up. actually not working out. Um I think. they closed down a store to avoid paying. us. So we're like, well, if we can't sue. the LLC, we'll we shut down their store, we'll just sue them personally, you. know. And so that lawsuit was filed. probably a couple days before I went to. Oregon, I'd say. >> So, so in other words, you couldn't even. get this in front of a court, get this. in front of a jury, litigate it. They.

closed the store, so there was nothing. left to do. So, you decided to go uh to. Utah now to confront uh Mr. Johnson, right? And explain to us what happened. there. >> So, um it's such a long story. So, first. before you can get a court case. approved, you have to have what's called. a good faith conversation. And I mean, every state's different, but in Marian. County court in Oregon, Utah, this is. their procedure, I guess. So, you have. to show actual verifiable proof that you. tried to have like resolve it outside of.

court first before I can get to a court. So, I uh go to Josh's house to basically. just talk this out with him like, "Hey, like we don't want to take you to court. Can we solve this like adults, you. know?" and he calls the cops on me and. they let me go, of course, um because I. didn't do anything illegal. And then. uh and then I'm like, "Okay, well, we. had the good faith conversation. My. court case gets approved." So, we next. step papers. Uh I can't serve him papers.

because I'm involved in the court case, but uh I so I just like literally put on. my Instagram story. I was like, "Hey, anyone want to like help me with a. video?" and someone reached out and I. felt kind of bad sending her there by. herself because she's like a girl going. to this unhinged like kind of lunatic. guy who literally the previous day made. a false Yeah, we think he made a false. arrest saying we had heroin in our car. and we got a three-hour search on our. car the day before. So, this guy is. unhinged. He actually we found out later.

that it's good that I play with her. because he said he was going to shoot. the next person that like walks on his. property or something and he told that. to the police. So um basically I was. sitting in the car next to her and we. got permission from the police. We said, "Hey, is it okay if we do this? We will. sit in the the street like we pay taxes, you know, so like we have a right to be. on the street like the sidewalk and when. he walks outside then we'll serve him. his paper and the police like, "Yep, that's fine. As long as you're in the.

street, just don't go. You Ben. specifically don't go on his property.". And so we're going to wait for him to. come outside and then the girl was going. to start his court paper. But before we. could do that, he called the cops on us. And at first the cops are like, "Okay, like I see what you guys are doing here. Like this is the legal way to do it.". They leave. He calls the cops on us. again. Um I think the cops just ended up. leaving and coming back for probably. like a two or three hour period until. finally Josh has convinced the police. that this is a fake lawsuit. And we see.

this in the unredacted body camp, but. he's like it I think he said it's a. billion a million billion gajillion time. percent fake is what he said and his. exact quotes and he's now fully. convinced the police department this is. a fake lawsuit. So the police officer. actually goes and calls the court. verifies it's a real lawsuit and then. after that that's when they arrest me I. guess. >> Yeah. So, in body cam footage, you see. the various interactions with Ben and.

others who were reportedly connected to. him, even the guy who allegedly tried to. get to one of the manager's homes under. the pretext of a religious meeting. >> This is what we're required to do from. the United States. So, we're just. following the instructions of the. government. >> He does not want the paper. So, >> he's not want the papers. >> Here's that back for you. >> Um, he wanted you trespassed. Okay. I. stand over here. Do you have any weapons. or anything like that on you? Uh, no. >> Okay, the trans be find your back. Am. >> I being arrested? >> They're under arrest right now for. stalking.

>> They're arresting me because this guy. stole a bunch of Legos. >> So, according to police reports and body. cam footage, Schneider was arrested. twice by American Fork police, charged. with misdemeanors of stalking and. targeted residential picketing. And then. in a separate case, he was charged with. disorderly conduct and criminal trespass. in connection with an incident on. December 10th, 2025. In May, Ben. releases a video series and it goes. viral. Millions of views about this. whole situation. Basically accused.

corporate company, this is corporate. company, Bricks and Minigs of stealing, claim the police are trying to protect. them. Now, there are a few legal. developments that have happened. So, Bricks and Minifigs ended up filing a. lawsuit against Schneider, Manel, and. others. Includes 13 causes of action. RICO. So, racketeering, uh, defamation. per se, defamation, injurious falsehood, civil conspiracy, torches interference, civil stalking, nuisance, trespass, intentional infliction of emotional. distress, unjust enrichment, declaratory.

relief, injunctive relief, and corporate. claims that Ben and Menel allegedly. coordinated this massive multi-platform. media campaign designed not to find the. truth. It's not about reporting, they. claim, but it was about extortion to. extort money and damage the company's. brand and reputation. That this was done. for money, that it was a very lucrative. commercial prank stunt to get clicks, get all this money on GoFundMe, boost. Patreon uh subscribers, and they claim. that that this wasn't investigative.

journalism, but across the line. and. they talk about and there's allegations. of fake raffle materials and fake. Guinness World Record style award uh. disguises, posting signs, one that. allegedly said, "We steal from old. people." That this resulted in online. harassment and review bombing and death. threats. And it looks like they're. seeking hundreds of thousands of dollars. in damages. And they also reportedly. just got a win in court, a TTRO, a. temporary restraining order. I'm going.

to read it to you directly. It says, quote, "The court finds that Bricks and. Miniigs corporate and its affiliates are. suffering immediate and irreparable. financial and reputational injuries that. cannot be easily fixed or adequately. compensated with money." Court stated. plaintiffs are substantially likely to. prevail on the merits of their claims. against codefendants, meaning against. Schneider and Mancel. So the defendants. are prohibited from contacting, harassing, stalking, or intimidating any. of the plaintiffs, their corporate. employees, the store owners, stalking,

trespassing, or targeting, picketing. anywhere near the private residences or. storefronts belonging to the plaintiffs, publishing, distributing, or. broadcasting false, defamatory, or. disparaging images or statements. regarding the business or its. affiliates, soliciting, or recruiting. Bricks and Minifigs employees, franchises, or contractors to act as. Undercover agents leak confidential. information or secretly record video or. audio inside the retail stores.

Creating, orchestrating or participating. in stage confrontations or deceptive. activities relating to the plaintiffs. using fabricated deceptive or. misrepresented instruments such as fake. contracts, fake fake raffles, mock. lotteryies, or sham court papers to. pressure or target the plaintiffs. So, what happens? Well, Reckless Ben goes on. camera and says while we're all waiting. for the next part of his series about. this, now legally because of the TTRO,

he can't release it. >> Episode 3 is finally finished after. crazy all-nighters and basically. destroying my health, but I can't post. it or I will go to jail. And not only. that, I will also immediately lose my. lawsuit of $300,000 and the GoFundMe we. made for Brian will go straight to this. mystery company that I am no longer. allowed to talk about. >> So that's where we are. Okay. And I want. to understand who has a good legal.

argument in all of this. All right. So. I'm so happy to bring him on. Litigator, friend of the show, Rich Showenstein. Rich, I'm made of questions. I haven't. spoken to an attorney yet. uh on sidebar. about this. So, I'm so happy to get your. thoughts. Can we first start with the. TTRO? Can we start with the temporary. restraining order because that's the big. news that came out. Um your thoughts on. that TTRO. >> So, I looked at the TTRO. First of all, I I mean, everyone loves Legos. Here's a.

little Lego version of me. >> By the way, is that Oh my gosh, that's. amazing. >> So, >> who who got that for you? >> I don't I don't remember. But uh I don't. remember. The only thing that can make. Legos more fun is litigation. >> Well, first let me just tell you I found. out it's not even Legos. It's no plural. It's Lego. There's no I didn't know that. and I found that out during the courses. So there you go. >> Okay. So the TTRO first of all, let's. talk about a TTRO. A TTRO is a temporary.

restraining order. And the key word. there is temporary. It's only in place. until the court can have a. [clears throat] preliminary injunction. hearing and make a decision on the. preliminary injunction application after. seeing all the evidence and if the court. wants after seeing live testimony, witnesses, documents. So, it is a. placeholder. But the temporary. restraining order here issues really. broad relief including, you know, not.

making. not intimidating any witnesses and that. kind of thing, but also not making any. public statements and essentially. requiring the take down of some of this. video content as far as I can tell. And. it does all of that without requiring a. bond. Uh, which is interesting, too. >> Can you explain that? What do you mean? >> So, ordinarily, when you get a temporary. restraining order or a preliminary.

injunction, you have to post some sort. of bond. The court requires you to put. up money to secure the defendant for any. damages. If it's ultimately ruled that. the injunction is unlawful or shouldn't. have been entered. And so if the. defendant's going to be harmed, you. would require the plaintiff to put up. money that could be paid to the. defendant if that turns out to be the. case. But this court said, "No bond. required. We're going to give you the. injunction. We don't see it harming.

anybody in any way and therefore we're. not going to require it be. collateralized at all. >> Didn't the court when the court says the. likelihood of success on the merits are. they basically saying reckless Ben. you're going to lose this thing? >> Yes, they are basically saying. >> and why do they think that? Why would. the court think that? >> So I I'm not deep enough into this to. figure that out. I I do see the. complaint here is 95 pages long, has 13. causes of action, there's defamation,

there's RICO, there are other claims, and the court must have felt there was. something substantial about the. allegations that were being made. Um, and and likelihood of success on the. merits doesn't mean you win. It just. means we've looked at this and from what. we can see so far, you have a pretty. good chance of prevailing. To be clear, you've seen TTRO's granted, but at the end of the day, if it goes to. trial, that party could still lose. So, it's it's still still a potentiality.

that um Bricks Bricks and Minifigs and. Johnson, they could potentially lose. this lawsuit even if they got the TTRO. at the beginning, right? >> Well, they could lose the lawsuit. They. could also lose it preliminary. injunction hearing. So sometimes you get. a temporary restraining order, but you. go do the preliminary injunction hearing. and the court changes their mind because. >> at that stage, right, at the TTRO stage, you've really only heard from one side. You've heard from the pliff and they're.

going to put their best foot forward. But at a preliminary injunction hearing, you're probably going to get a. substantial argument from the defendants. and you're going to hear their point of. view. And so sometimes it changes at. that stage. >> How could Ben challenge it? >> Well, first of all, he can show that his. reporting is, you know, he can attempt. to show that his reporting is fair and. accurate. Uh to the extent there are. arguments here that he's like engaged in.

in interference or witness intimidation. or something like that, he can provide. testimony that he didn't do it or it's. being misinterpreted. he can take on the. evidentiary predicates of the. application. >> What about a first amendment argument? Hey, I'm an investigator here. I'm I'm. posting things on social media. I'm. talking about what I went through. Uh. this is an illegal prior restraint on. protected speech, this TTRO. What's the. line there? What's their argument there?

>> Yeah. So, that's a very interesting one. to sort out because you're right. you. don't want to prohibit speech. But I. think from what I know about this, Ben. isn't just commentating. It's one thing for you and I to go on, you know, we're going to be on YouTube, right, with this session and we're. discussing the thing and we're. commentating and we're offering. opinions. We're not getting involved, right? We're we're not on the scene in.

Oregon or Utah challenging people who. are involved in this. We haven't become. part of the case in the way that I think. Ben probably has. So, we're not in the. line of fire like he is going to be. Commentary. Is it commentary or is he. getting directly involved and trying to. put his thumb on the scale of this? That. was the whole uh totally different whole. Don Lemon situation too. It raises those. kind of interesting questions between.

just covering and being involved in it. Okay, I do want to take a step back. here. Um there's an interesting part and. I played it before when I spoke to Ben. um about this where he says, "Look, the. reason I went there is because my. understanding of state law is that. before I can even go forward uh with a. fullblown lawsuit, I got to negotiate in. good faith. I have to have a good faith. conversation with the people we're. planning on suing. U you know, small. claims court. Um and then there's this. other part where he says, "Listen, I I.

in terms of serving the the papers, um. anybody over 18 can be a process server, not me, because I'm I'm a party to this. case. I'm I'm interested party in this. So, I'm trying to have people serve the. papers." I I know you might not know. that state law. Um, and I'm sure you're. going to say probably should have just. hired a process server if that's the. situation. But have you ever heard of. anything where you have to make a good. faith attempt to mediate or settle or. negotiate before you go to the courts? And does it look like something like Ben.

is accused of doing? >> So, I'm not familiar with that. That. that's not the case in New York where I. practice that you would have to make a. good faith effort to resolve the dispute. before you bring a claim. Uh, I'd have. to look at the state law to see if that. really is the case. And also whether. that really requires you to go in. person. I mean, can't you do that by. letter or email or phone call or invite. a video conference? Did you really have.

to go there? And the idea that you had. to go there to engage a process server, that's not valid at all. There are a lot. of process servers out there who operate. nationally. They have whole networks for. this kind of thing. You can find a. processed server and you know two clicks. of your mouse and a phone call. So you. don't need to fly to a different state. to do it. >> And I guess the argument would be okay. assuming he he was under the law. required to have a good faith. negotiation. That could be an email.

That could be a call. And if it's not. returned, if it's not answered, you say, "Okay, I tried. That's the way I tried. I don't I don't have to go to the. person's house." Right. I think that. could be a challenge. Right. >> Yeah. I I can't see any law that says. you have to ring somebody's doorbell in. 2026. I I I would be really shocked if. that's it. I mean, if if he was supposed. to reach out, there must have been other. ways to do it. And certainly in a. situation where you expect you're going. to be rebuffed, there's no point in. going all the way out there. Talk to me.

about this lawsuit though against Ben. and Brian Mensel. From an optics point. of view, you know, uh, on social media, online, so many people have taken their. side. They're like, you're suing the guy. who lost his whatever you want to call. it, how how much it's valued, let's just. say $200,000 Lego collection, maybe. less, but he's trying to get it back, get the money back. You decide to sue. him. From an optics point of view, it. looks bad. But from a legal point of. view, what do you make of their.

allegations? Again, you uh RICO. violations, defamation, uh civil. stalking, trespass, civil conspiracy, torchious interference with economic. relations, intentional infliction of. emotional distress, injurious falsehood, trade disparagement, false light, nuisance. They threw everything. Um, from what you've seen so far, I'm not. surprised that in a lawsuit, you try to. throw as many claims as you can. Do you. think, and look, the court has already. issued a TTRO, but do you think that. there's something here? Do you think.

that this is a strong lawsuit? >> I c I can't really tell from the lawsuit. itself. It So, let's start with the. basic dispute here. This is a. consignment dispute where somebody. consigned to a store a bunch of used. Lego to sell. And I gather there's a. consignment agreement. I haven't read it. yet. I'm interested to read it. But that. thing ought to be a matter of contract.

What were the obligations of both sides? And that ought to settle issues like. could they ship it to another state if. the consignment shop was sold, which. apparently is what happens here. >> Well, also I'll tell you the parent. company seems to say we didn't even know. about this. that the owner of that place. like like she did it on her own and now. she's suing uh she's suing uh bricks and. mini fakes, >> right? So, there's a there's a small. consignment disagreement worth somewhere.

between zero and $200,000. that is not worth going to court over. It ought to be settled. It ought to be. dealt with on the contract. It ought to. be negotiated. But now what's happened. is this thing has exploded on social. media and I wonder if it has become a. significant problem for uh for the the. entity the what's the name of the. seller? >> Bricks and Minifigs. >> Bricks and Minigs. I wonder if it's.

affecting the business of Bricks and. Minifigs in a meaningful way, making it. much more than a $200,000 dispute. because that would be the only. justification. for throwing in, you know, basically. a 100page complaint uh and a you know, very aggressive litigation strategy. You. wouldn't do that to avoid paying. $200,000. It makes no economic sense.

>> You would only do that if there's. something bigger and larger at stake. And maybe there is. >> I wonder how much of it is the PR of it, right? So, if you're Ben, if you're. Brian and you're making waves with this, and it's viral, and you say, "Listen, we're going to try to go forward with. it. We're we'll defend ourselves as much. as possible because in a litigation, the. books will be open, right? The. discovery. If we can show that Bricks. and Minigs or Johnson or Best, they. weren't transparent about what happened.

to the Lego collection if they weren't. being honest about it, that in and of. itself could be a win, right? I mean, I. wonder how much that may be guiding the. motivations here as well, >> right? It may be an effort to respond to. the narrative that's emerged online. And. one other thing, Jesse, by suing Ben, you're also sending a message to other. content creators. be careful because we. might come after you too. And maybe part. of the strategy here is to try to subdue.

the online reaction and the online. discussion that's going on about this. case. Try to slow it down or even stop. it so it doesn't cause any more damage. >> Real Well, let me ask you about this. I. I mentioned it. So, uh, Law, who had, um, uh, been operating this Bricks and. Minifigs franchise in Salem, Oregon, claims that the corporate parents, so. Bricks and Minfigs, illegally ousted.

her. And law has filed this lawsuit. against them. And essentially, I'm going. to read you verbatim what it says, and. I'm just curious how this might affect. the whole situation. So it says this. action arises from the wrongful. termination of a bricks and minifigs. franchise in Salem, Oregon and the. franchisers's subsequent seizure of the. franchisees business assets and. defamation of the franchise owners in. November 2024. Uh BAM Bricks and. Minifigs without valid cause abruptly. terminated the franchise, changed the. locks, took control of the store and all.

its inventory. The purported defaults. BAM used as a pretext were problems of. BAM's own making and had been cured or. waved. BAM failed to transfer the. store's bank account and property lease. to plaintiffs as required directly. causing the payment issues later cited. as grounds for termination because they. talk about uh this store going bankrupt. Once plaintiffs discovered these. problems, they worked with BAM to cure. them and BAM accepted restructured. payments for many months without. complaint. BAM then refused to. compensate plaintiffs for the.

confiscated assets, effectively stealing. merchandise and equipment worth over. $100,000. And there's multiple causes of action, fraud, negligent misrepresentation, breach of contract, breach of implied. covenant of good faith and fair dealing, conversion, torches interference with. economic relations, defamation, civil. conspiracy, injurious falsehood, unlawful trade practice, unjust. enrichment, declaratory judgment. Look, the big the big deal here, Rich, the. reason I'm bringing this up is what. happened to Manel's Legos, right? And.

there's a dispute as to did Law do. something with them when this new. operators came in. Did they do something. with them? So, you had this other. lawsuit that I I don't think can be. ignored that may play a role in this. overall story. >> Yeah, absolutely. Might play a role in. the overall story. And I think everybody. wants the answer to the question. This. ought to be easy. If you're a. consignment shop and you take in. merchandise, then you keep records of.

what of that merchandise is sold, when, to whom, and for how much. And if you're. acquired, there should be a record of. the inventory that you transfer to the. new owner. And if the new owner takes it. from one state to another state, there. ought to be a record of that. But there. there will be extensive if these. litigations go forward, there will be. extensive discovery to try to get at the. books and records and really understand.

what happened probably brick by brick. what happened here with the merchandise. >> Let me ask you about real quick uh Ben's. uh if he's in legal jeopardy criminally. If you violate a TTRO, so if he starts. posting things or talking about it, can. he go to jail? Sure, you you you can I. mean a a judge can order what what would. happen if there was a violation of a. TTRO is that the party who obtained the. TTRO, the plane of here would go to the.

court and would bring a motion. in the first instance really just to. enforce the TTRO and could ask the court. for sanctions. You know, a court can. impose monetary sanctions. A court can. uh can impose contempt can find somebody. in contempt of a court order. And in. most states that I'm aware of, if. there's contempt of a court order, a a. court can send someone to jail as an.

inducement to comply. Now, I've never. actually seen somebody go to jail for. failing to abide a court order in a. civil case like this. Although, I have. been in cases where it's been. threatened, where it's gotten at least. that far. >> What about the actual criminal charges. he's facing currently? My understanding, misdemeanors, right? You know, disorderly conduct, trespassing, um, uh,

residential picketing. Um, he also made. the mention, I believe, that he thinks. he might be facing felonies down the. line. Two points to that. Do you think. these are, do you think that, you know, American Fork police came out and. basically said, "We were investigating. This is what we saw. They there's body. cam footage. I don't know if you've seen. it." Um, but they're basically saying. his actions or his alleged actions in. conjunction with others is what amounts. to this, right? Um, they didn't even. charge him, by the way. nothing to do.

with like forging documents. I know. there was a whole back and forth about. well were these legitimate court papers. that were trying to be served or not. It. wasn't even about that. It was like the. alleged actions he took uh with respect. to Johnson. Um so what do you make of. the charges that he's currently facing. and do you see any potential felony. charges being pursued? >> I don't know. There's so much to unpack. there because we have the whole sort of. interesting interplay between the.

American Fort Law Enforcement and the. the argument that they're doing this in. support of a local, you know, a Utah. business, maybe in a way that's overly. aggressive. Although you do have some. conduct by this content creator that I. think maybe crosses the line at becoming. too heavily involved instead of just. reporting on things that are not that. he's not part of. There's a lot to to.

figure out there. Could it amount to any. felony? I mean, it depends the extent to. which he trespassed or committed. disorderly conduct or if he threatened. people. Could that be a felony? Sure, that could be a felony. It's possible, >> right? But I guess his defense is, hey, I'm following the legal process. I'm. trying to get these papers served any. which way I can. Trying to have a good. faith conversation. I'm not, you know, there's a line there, I guess, right?

like what's the line between trespassing. and or harassment or disorderly conduct. versus I'm trying to you know follow the. legal process. And also there's an. there's an open question here, right? Th. this is. a civil dispute at its bottom, at its. core. And now there's a court that's. hearing the civil dispute and that court. has issued a TTRO and that court has. given expressed instructions, don't do. this anymore. So, if you are law.

enforcement, local law enforcement, you. might ask yourself, do we really need to. be involved with this? >> There there's a court on it. There's a. court policing it. >> Did he do anything that actually. requires further criminal proceedings? Or should we just let the civil court. run its process and sort this out? They're probably better equipped to. figure out this dispute than we are. And. then the the contra the counter to that.

is well no you you still have to enforce. the law right you still have to protect. the public if there's been crimes. committed you still have to prosecute. I. think those are difficult questions to. work out. >> Seems law enforcement is saying I get. everybody has feelings about this. business dispute. We're not even getting. involved in this dis business business. dispute. We're not even talking about. that. We're just looking at our laws on. the books and whether or not anybody. there was probable cause that they broke. them. So, look, it's a fascinating uh.

discussion. It's a fascinating situation. that's happening despite the fact. there's this TTRO. I've said it before, I say it again. I don't think the story. is going anywhere. I don't think this is. the last time that we've heard of. Reckless Ben and what's happening here. So, we'll continue to monitor it. Rich. Showenstein, thank you so much for. taking the time as always. Appreciate. it. >> My pleasure. Go Nicks. >> And that's all we have for you right now. here on Sidebar. Everybody, thank you so. much for joining us. And as always, please subscribe on YouTube, Apple. Podcast, Spotify, wherever you get your. podcasts. So, you can also check us out. on NBC's Peacock as well. If you want to.

follow me, X Instagram, my NewsNation. show, Jesse Weber live, Monday through. Friday, 11:00 p.m. Eastern. [music] I'll. see you next time, everybody.