Internet VS Bricks & Minifigs' Response

Added: 2026-06-03

[00:00:00]Over the past a few days, the bricks and minifigs situation has continued to explode. When Reckless Ben put out a second part to his series where in it he gets arrested and has his Airbnb raided by police where in the search warrant they accuse him of stealing Legos himself along with a whole bunch of other insane updates. Obviously, I recommend you watch that first for the sake of this video. It'll be linked in the description. But Bricks and Minifig Corporate has continued to respond, putting out more statements on their website and even doing interviews with YouTubers. However, it's few and far between in regards to comments showing them support. Along with all of this, a restraining order was filed against Ben by Bricks and Minifigs corporates, accusing him of causing heavy suffering to their brand. But there's a lot to get into, so let's just jump in. Welcome to the internet versus Bricks and Minigs responds. It starts when various people started posting about the new video that he made, like a temporary ad 7328 who posts on the Salt Lake City subreddit by saying, "Corrupt American Fork police exposed by YouTuber." And then Blue Run skier replies, "What's the TLDDR for those of us who won't watch a 40-minute YouTube video?" An important device says, "Essentially, members of the American fork community got away with violating the guy's rights." They wrongfully detain him. They also wrongfully arrest him, and then later they wrongfully raid the house that he's staying in and arrest him again. He never does anything to break the law.

[00:01:16]After he gets out on bail, they send another warrant for his arrest with no bail. Each time he was arrested, the cause was made up by someone he's trying to serve papers to. The whole through line of this video is that he's trying to get money back from a businessman who scammed an old man out of 200 grand worth of Legos, though an ownership change and some consignment. Tricky, the Legos were stolen. The guy comes to Utah to confront two of the Lego business owners, and he's met with 911 abuse, police harassment, and jail time for nothing. Edit: He's also in Mexico now, avoiding the arrest. He had to flee the damn country. SMH and Biotech Princess says, "Don't forget the part where he was walking peacefully and the officer detained him, accused him of trying to run away, and ripped his arm out of the socket." That part was blatant criminal behavior by the cop. And Pink Tulip says, "That angered me to the core." And Snoop Panda says, "If you watch both videos covering this, they are literally amazingly made. Then you'll be livid for hours like me." Lol. Refund Droid says, "Next lawsuit, American Fork PD." And mysterious past replies, "Someone needs to sue them, the Mormon Church, and Utah as a whole." I bet they are all in it together. There's also another response made by Bricks and Minigs on their official page. Now, we covered the first response in the first part. However, this is an additional response and there is some more information and more claims that they make in this response. Some of it's repeated, but I think it's still important to read and so the marketing team posts a response to customer inquiries regarding Bricks and Minfigs to stay in Oregon. Clarity and resolution of an isolated and in former franchisees private civil disputes. When people think of bricks and minigs, they think of families and children and a shared love for building something together. They don't think of manufactured claims, legal battles, zealous online profiteers, viral mischaracterizations, sensationalization, and heated disagreements. Seeing a father and his family at the center of a dispute regarding an unauthorized consignment is heartbreaking. We understand why people might initially react with suspicion online. The headline, although false, stating, "Bam stole an old man's life savings would make anyone curious.

[00:03:06]However, there's always more to the story. While our initial responses focused on legal defenses that unfortunately take time and are ongoing.

[00:03:12]And because we as an entire brand are now forced to process a massive wave of online chaos, we feel the online community deserves a clear response to customer inquiries and the hopeful resolution of an isolated and former franchisees private disputes. We embrace the self-reflection but champion the unfiltered truth. We want to be entirely transparent about what happened and what we are doing to fix it so a situation like this never happens again. At BAM franchising, the franchiser for the bricks and minifigs brand, our community is built on trust, passion, and a shared love for creativity. Over the last several weeks, a deeply distressing and manufactured narrative has circulated online regarding our Salem, Oregon location. This article seeks to establish the truth of the situation publicly. Executive summary: The public narrative surrounding bricks and minifigs claims that corporate leadership and our new Salem franchises and knowingly stole a 100k to 200k LEGO collection from an elderly collector and his family. This is not true. The actual origin of this dispute lies in an unauthorized legal consignment arrangement between an independent former franchisee of the Salem store and the Mantel family. When BAM corporate repossessed the store due to the formers owners of financial defaults and other breaches, BAM was unaware of any unauthorized and undisclosed consignment agreements and was not a party to such.

[00:04:16]In fact, the collection was not even located in the store based on our investigation. No credible evidence to the contrary has been found, including from Mr. Manel. However, we are hopeful the individuals involved in this private dispute can resolve such among themselves, which we support. Our goal is to ensure this grandfather and his family are not left out or penalized for a localized failure. After taking over the store, we discovered a small number of sets valued between 2 to 5 grand that could possibly be related to Mr. Mantel's collection based on the limited information we received. We offered to return these items to the Mantel family, though BAM had no legal obligation to do so, but it was refused. However, BAM's past offers to assist in resolving this third party dispute still stand today, including that we are willing to work with both of them to try to locate any remaining items, though most appear to have been sold prior to BAM's repossession of the store. We refuse to let a private legal battle obscure our core values. Moving forward, we are implementing a more rigorous recordkeeping, inventory management, and more transparency in our buy, sell, and trade process, and deescalation training with corporate and franchises and their staff. Claims we've seen online. What is true? A family is caught in the middle.

[00:05:18]The Mantel family entered into a consignment agreement with the former Salem franchisee Crystal Law/Gorman unlawfully, and the family allegedly has not been paid or made whole by her, the former store owner. Corporate lawfully repossessed a defaulting store. BAM corporate repossessed the Salem location because the previous independent owner had stopped making payments on the purchase of the location, had not been paying royalties for multiple months, and owed additional tens of thousands in back pay for unpaid expenses on her behalf. Bam found a small portion of inventory and offered it back, though it may not have been Mr. Mantels. Our incoming team found a small remnant of sets estimated between 2 and 5 grand that appeared to be similar to the sets consigned. We set them aside and offered them to Manel as a courtesy. The offer still stands. Security issues for the collection. On a podcast in 2025, Mr. Manel shared that the Salem store had been broken into several times during the period she had his collection, raising serious questions about security for the inventory. The collection was moved off site. In a separate written statement, Mr. Mantel acknowledged that Law/Gorman had removed sets from the store to an off-site secure location and that customers had to buy them first before they would be retrieved from storage. BAM corporate never took possession of or had access to this off-site storage facility. The former franchisee had been selling the collection for over a year. A recent audit of point of sale POS system records that over $50,000 worth of similar inventory was sold by law/corman during that time period. We must tighten our franchise roles. This situation proves that we cannot simply assume every local franchisee is following protocol. We will reinforce existing prohibitions on store level side deals.

[00:06:45]Bricks and Mini Fig specifically trains owners not to offer consignment. The franchisement agreement states, "You agree that your store will use and or offer only services, products, and merchandise as set forth in the operations manual or as otherwise approved by us and as may be periodically modified by us and our sole discretion." The 2023 owner operations manual, which the former franchisee was bound to, states, "Make sure your business only buys. We do not lend, loan, consign, or pawn on any product that comes in." Then the statement continues, "What is false? Corporate took on the consignment liability. We acknowledge a corporate support employee verbally said the new owner would take all that consignment liability when store ownership changed hands. The employee wasn't making any formal agreement or committing the company legally. The statement's intention was that any consignment inventory in the store would go back to its rightful owner. Not that we were taking any agreements on ourselves. Our approach from that start has been simple. Any inventory that does not belong to us should go back to its rightful owner.

[00:07:36]Bam corporate or the new franchises stole a100 to $200,000 collection.

[00:07:40]Neither corporate nor the incoming owners Josh Johnson and Brandon Best ever took, sold, or concealed this collection. Detailed inventory logs evidence that any collector's items were already missing before we ever stepped foot inside. The collection was worth 200 grand. While viral headlines used the 100 to 200 grand figure, the only documentation provided by the family months later was a spreadsheet detailing a collection worth somewhere in the range of 60 to 80K. We were given records and documentation. Despite multiple requests, we never received verifiable copies of the signed contract, receipts of what had been paid to the manels or a full true up of the inventory list. The store closed due to a lawsuit. The Salem store did not close because of a lost illegal case. It closed temporarily because our staff, including local teenagers, faced severe realorld safety hazards, targeted in-person stalking, and explicit bomb threats driven by viral videos. What is unknown, the actual fate of the missing sets. While the online campaign disparages corporates, the actual evidence strongly indicates that most of the sets were sold by law/Gorman and any remaining inventory was stored offsite prior to Bam's repossession of the store, regarding which BAM has never had knowledge of, control over, or access to. Standing together, defending our franchisees model and our beloved community. While we are completely willing to look in the mirror and tighten our business practices and improve our corporate oversightes, we must also draw a hard line against the aggressive lawless bullying that has targeted our brand. Bricks and Minifig is not a faceless monolithic conglomerate. We are a network of over 300 locations across the United States and Canada. Almost entirely owned and operated by local families, moms and dads, and passionate members of the LEGO community. These franchises invest themselves and savings into building joyful environments for children and collectors. Over the last several months, our ecosystem has been subjected to a vicious and unlawful campaign of disparagement and harassment. Content creators dropped sensationalized videos engineered entirely for clicks, views, and monthly subscriptions. Other online commentators blindly repeated these false accusations as absolute truth without reaching out to bricks and minifig for a statement, a comment, or consideration of the truth. As a direct result of this reckless approach common in internet culture, innocent people have faced real world trauma. Local small business owners who have absolutely nothing to do with the Salem store have had their livelihoods threatened and their characters and reputations assassinated online through coordinated review bombing and negative comments, messages, emails, and phone calls. Teenage employees working their first retail jobs have been cornered, recorded, and aggressively harassed.

[00:09:53]Private families have had content creators show up at their residences in disguises, leak personal information, stalk their neighborhoods, and compromise the safety of their homes.

[00:10:01]Our community spaces have been disrupted by coordinated bomb threats and safety hazards. This is not advocacy. This is not consumer protection. It is targeted harassment and demonetization of a conflict negatively affecting tens of thousands of owners and customers across our stores. We will not be bullied into silence, nor will we allow online mobs to destroy a brand built on honesty and imagination. Our business model centered on the joyful exchange of Lego products through buy, sell, and trade stands strong. We stand behind our dedicated franchises across the nation who pour their hearts into their communities every day. To the real building community, the families, the adult fans of LEGO, and the neighbors who know who we truly are, we thank you for standing with us. We are doing the hard work to make things right, to protect our customers, and to hold ourselves to the highest possible standards. We ask that you look at the facts, reject the manufacturer drama and unlawful activities, and continue supporting your local brick and mortar Lego resale stores. Together, we will keep building.

[00:10:50]Frequently asked questions. Question: If you wanted a resolution, why not just pay the money demanded online? answer.

[00:10:56]We are completely willing to sit down and figure out a fair reality based way to ensure this grandfather is made whole. However, there is a fundamental difference between a good faith resolution and giving in to a coordinated viral extortion campaign. We will not reward individuals who use fake delivery uniforms, forge signatures, staged police encounters, and residential harassment to manufacture a story line for profit. We want to help the family. We will not reward a toxic online circus. Question: How is corporate holding itself accountable to ensure this never happens again? Answer.

[00:11:22]We are taking hard lessons from the situation and using them to strengthen our franchise operations. We are implementing three strict pillars of systemic accountability. One, more rigorous recordkeeping and inventory management. We are updating our inventory logging requirements. This means mandating real-time digital tracking from the moment a collection enters the store. Creating an indisputable permanent identifiable paper trail that protects both the collector and the business. This process began in January 2025 and continues to be tightened and refined. Two, absolute transparency in the buy, sell, and trade process. We are completely eliminating ambiguity at the counter. Every single customer transaction, especially large-scale trades, will require standardized corporate approved disclosure forms. Informal off-the-books side deals or localized consignment arrangements will continue to be strictly prohibited systemwide. Three, mandatory professional behavior and deescalation training. We are introducing comprehensive training for all corporate staff, franchise owners, and their staff, as well as new and incoming franchises. This curriculum focuses on maintaining strict professional boundaries, handling complex customer disputes with empathy and clarity, and understanding the precise corporate protocols required to resolve a store level issues safely and professionally. Internal reviews are actively being executed, and any deviations from corporate standards will be addressed through formal corrective actions. Question: Is the offer to help find and return the sets identified as similar, though not proven to be Mr. Manels still valid? Answer: Yes. Our position has been and remains that we are willing to help the parties resolve their private disputes, including the Mantel family. How we can to the extent any inventory owned by the Mantel family can be reliably confirmed as having been in BAM's possession, we are willing to identify it and coordinate its return.

[00:12:53]We are also offering to assist in the recovery of any financial amounts that may be owed. But that process must be handled through lawful channels supported by documentation and coordinated with the Mantel family or our authorized legal representatives.

[00:13:04]Because there have been conflicting claims, unauthorized third parties, and public statements that do not match the documentation provided to us, we cannot responsibly resolve the matter through social media demands or individuals who have not established the legal authority to act on the family's behalf. We remain willing to help, but we need authentic and reliable documentation and proper representation necessary to do so responsibly and fairly. And now, as a quick disclaimer for the next part of this video, the account that we will be showing, to the best of my understanding, is a parody account. It is not associated with Bricks and Minifigs Corporate. only saw that they just started posting a couple days ago, so it is not official, but some of the tweets that they're posting are going viral with many people responding to it and some tweets getting hundreds of thousands of views. But again, as a disclaimer, my understanding is that this is a parody account. And there's this post in the account that says, "Welcome to the shelves, Packwatch. Hey, actions have consequences. Welcome to the real world." And there's this set that shows what appears to be Ben here getting arrested and the collection behind him along with saying reckless Benjamin and police officers and the CEO smoking. This tweet here has 375,000 views with multiple people replying with this image of the we steal from old people logo along with Mo Man replying of this edited image that was featured in Ben's video saying I stole a dying man's life savings. Anonymous says stop stealing from people. And just as confirmation, Joe replies, "I don't think it's a great idea to impersonate a business when said a business is an illegal dispute, but that's just me."

[00:14:29]And the account replies, "Brics and figs is not associated with Bricks and Minigs." And Joe says, "I am very much aware, hence why I said impersonating.

[00:14:36]You have a blue check mark and do not have a parody in your Twitter username, only a disclaimer on your profile that many Twitter users are not reading." And the account says, "A disclaimer is not necessary as we are a separate entity."

[00:14:47]And the Raven says, "Then change the PFP." and the account replies comparing the two profile pictures. We have the bricks and figs on the left here and then the official bricks and mini figs logo on the right. This account also continues to post. They put this video on their page with a caption, "Here's an activity idea that won't break the bank.

[00:15:05]Thank you to the true BAM lovers. We greatly appreciate you and your support." And then they attach this video. And just for context, this is a video made by an official Bricks and Miniigs Powell Instagram account.

[00:15:15]However, it is from 44 weeks ago, so I don't believe it's in response to the current controversy. It appears the parody count is just using it, and it is the person running through the store, pretending to steal Legos, and then running out of the store. And then the person in the video says this, "Well, obviously this isn't a serious video. It is a serious issue. Bricks and miniix have been stolen from, which obviously hurts small businesses. So, shout out to you true Lego lovers who come support local businesses like ours. Ascend to my PSA. Follow for more LEGO content.

[00:15:44]>> They also made this post saying, "Good night, Brick Nation. We love you. We're going to get through this together." And Joseph replies, "Disgusting thieves and liars. This company needs to be destroyed." Common Sense Project says, "You're a disgusting organization. Do the right thing. Stop pussyfooting around the issue and do what's right.

[00:16:00]These days of attacking the person presenting the corruption are over." On another note, Coffeezilla also tweets out that he will be speaking on the situation when he posts on Twitter to everyone asking about Bricks and Minigs.

[00:16:11]I'm well aware and have been reaching out behind the scenes to get everyone's story, including the Reckless Ben plus Aman McN, who both have been doing interviews recently. My video on this will be out hopefully in a day or two.

[00:16:21]And Christmas Town Enjoyer says, "Would be great if you were the one person who didn't blindly go along with Reckless Ben's narrative, which is clearly sensationalized and intended to deceive, and did a real investigation of the claims made so far. Based on all available evidence, it appears the previous store owners are actually the guilty party and nod bam." And Wi-Fi Punk says, "Out of curiosity, you got a link to that evidence. From my understanding, the new owners inherited the contract and held on to the inventory. Sensationalism gets clicks, but I've been looking for anything to contest that and would love to see what you're referring to." in Christmas Town Enjoyer says the new owners only had whatever inventory was still on location, which was a very small portion of the total claimed missing inventory.

[00:16:58]This, according to statements made by BAM and their CEO. I know you'll likely disregard anything coming from BAM based on how the facts so far have been presented, but any of their statements, if untrue, will be easily disproven in a court of law. And Wi-Fi Punk replies, I'm not disregarding that at all. I'm just asking if you have a link. I agree though. Just because someone is caught lying, it doesn't make everything else they ever say inherently a lie. It just makes what they say harder to believe.

[00:17:20]And Christmas Town Enjoyer replies with a link to a interview where the CEO was interviewed by AOB in the caption.

[00:17:26]Here's the link. And Carson replies, "Bro gave us a 2-hour nothing burger."

[00:17:30]However, this full live stream will be linked in the description if you want to watch it yourself. It is about 2 hours and most of it is him interviewing the CEO. But here is some of the comments on the video. Joel says, "Muppet CEO is legit destroying a $400 million company for 200 grand. What an absolute loser."

[00:17:46]BlinkMe says, "Wah, all our individual stores are being harassed because I'm a scumbag and a terrible CEO. We're the victims here. Watching this company burned to the ground due to corrupt and terrible leadership will be bittersweet." Mr. Dean Ween says, "This video should be called How to Make Things Worse in 60 Minutes." Judge Middleton says his answers were contradictory. Guy's crooked AF. And Retro Vibes replies, "First, he's claiming they didn't have a single one of Brian's sets when they took over the store. Then he's claiming they offered to resolve the matter by giving Brian a bunch of sets they had on hand as some form of goodwill gesture. That makes absolutely zero sense if you genuinely believe you did nothing wrong. If some random dude accused me of stealing his TV, but I know for a fact I bought that TV at Walmart and I've had it for 2 years, I'm not giving that guy anything.

[00:18:27]But if I did steal it and was insisting on keeping it, I'd totally offer him 50 bucks as long as he promises to leave me alone forever and let me keep his TV.

[00:18:35]That goodwill gesture was going to give them necessary fuel they needed to claim they resolved the matter with Brian. And I scrolled through most of the comments to try to find any comments that were positive towards the CEO just to include a fair and balanced approach, but I genuinely could not find any. There is some criticism levied towards AOB like Flaming Nats who says nice softball interview and AOB says softball. It was a Lego scandal interview. But yeah, this is a scrolling through of the comments.

[00:18:58]There is pretty much the CEO stole the set. What a joke of an interview. The American police are useless and corrupt.

[00:19:05]Calling them liars. Mormon Jesus is watching. I can't. Pretty much everything is calling him a psychopath or saying that the interview was terrible. It'll still be linked in the description if you want to watch it. But generally, this is the takeaway from the whole multi-hourong interview. But AOB also did an interview with the COO, the brother of the CEO. And in that interview, they mentioned that there is a lawsuit filed against Ben and Professional Cow on the Lego Circle Derk subreddit posted with the caption bricks and minifigs lawsuit against Brian and Ben dropped. And just for context, dropped in this context just means it's out now. It's here. It's been filed. OP is saying that like news dropped, like there's new news. Not necessarily saying that the lawsuit has been dropped or disregarded. People in the comments were clarifying that it is not dismissed, just new dropped. But anyway, continuing, OP then says, "Enough possible. Purchase a copy of the complaint and tro BAM's COO publicly encouraged people to read their arguments. There is no public info of any of the victims. Please don't delete this mods." And then there's a link here that houses the information. For example, under BAM court records here, we have probable cause, which in this first affidavit here, this is the police being called on Ben leading to his arrest. It says Ben Schneider for stalking and targeted residential picketing. I believe there's probable cause to charge the defendant with these charges because on March 10th, 2026, the victim reported that a woman was taking photos of the front of his residence in American Fork. I spoke with the victim by phone. In this context, the victim is Josh, who was spoken about in part two of the series, and that's just for context. It says he reported that Ben Schneider was stalking his house. The victim said people were coming up to his windows and taking pictures, which scared his wife and children. The victim reported the suspects were currently parked in front of and beside his house with two cars. He said that every day the suspects arrived with two cars full of kids to stalk his house and harass his family. I arrived at the victim's residence and observed a vehicle parked on the street next to the residence. A woman was in the driver's seat and a man later identified as Ben Paul Schneider was in the passenger seat. I asked Ben if they had been knocking on the residence. Benjamin replied no and told me that they were trying to serve the victim legal papers. The victim's doorbell camera shows the female coming up to his front door. I asked Benjamin who they worked for. He told me that he worked for himself and that the woman was there to serve the victim papers.

[00:21:09]The victim explained that he works for a company that recovered a property from a franchise location in Oregon. He said a third party involved in the franchise was trying to hold him responsible for property at that location. The victim reported that the third party hired Benjamin, a YouTuber, to harass him and others involved. The victim said that other parties in Provo and Sandy had cases opening against Benjamin for harassment and stalking. I verified this with the Sandy Police Department, who confirmed that they were screening charges against Benjamin. The victim said that for the last 3 days, he was calling the police daily because people were taking photos of his house and tried to open his door. He added that on Sunday, an individual pretending to be a postal worker came to his house to deliver a package and tried to get his signature. The victim said that Benjamin had previously been trespassed from his property, so Benjamin now has other people come to his residence and knock on his behalf. I explained to the victim that the individuals were trying to serve him civil papers. The victim responded that he did not want them because he believed they were fake. I spoke in more detail with the victim and the victim's boss, who both reiterated that there were no court cases open involving the victim or the company the victim worked for. Officers found a sign in the park strip across the street from the victim's residence. The sign showed an image of the victim holding money with the statement, "I stole a dying man's life savings." I asked Benjamin if he put up the sign. He replied yes and said that the sign was intended to get the victim to come outside. Benjamin said that the victim stole $250,000 worth of products from the third party individual and that the third party's families contacted him to cover the story. Benjamin stated that he sued the victim and won, but the victim closed the store to avoid paying. As a result, Benjamin said he was now suing the victim personally. Benjamin said that over the past few days, he came to have a good faith conversation before suing the victim. Instead of speaking with him, Benjamin said the victims called the police to avoid getting in trouble and that the victim wanted them to sit outside his house and serve him papers.

[00:22:41]I explained to Benjamin that this approach was not working and that he needed to contact the court regarding other means of serving the victim with paperwork. He responded that it was working and had always worked before.

[00:22:49]Officers responded to the victim's residence on two prior occasions involving individuals delivering packages on Benjamin's behalf. In one incident, a person hired by Benjamin went to the victim's residence and recorded him from outside. On another incident, Benjamin told officers that he intended to use the victim's signature to forge documents, preventing the victim from trespassing him from his residence. I spoke with an officer at the Sandy Police Department who reported similar incidents involving Benjamin and individuals delivering packages to a victim in Sandy and that they were screening charges against Benjamin. The Provo Police Department is referring charges for commercial obstruction against Benjamin regarding an incident in February. Because Benjamin was trespassed from the residence, returned, parked outside, had multiple people knock on the door, park outside, photographed the residence, deliver packages, and posted signs with the victim's face outside the home. I believe there is probable cause to charge him with stalking. I performed a Utah criminal history and triple three criminal history check on Benjamin Paul Schneider and found no previous arrests or convictions. Benjamin Paul Schneider lives in California. I am requesting that he be held until his court date as he poses a flight risk and has multiple open cases in two different counties involving harassment, stalking, and commercial obstruction. Due to the evidence in this case, I am charging Benjamin Paul Schneider with the following offenses: stalking, targeted residential picketing, and then the officers submitting the affidavit along with other various things being attached like under the warrants section, we actually have the warrant that was used for the search warrants for the Airbnb that Ben was staying at. We won't read this one, but essentially there is the section here that Ben shows on his part two video that in the city of American Fork, there is now certain property or evidence described as any stolen merchandise, specifically Lego merchandise for the Airbnb he was staying at. There's also the temporary restraining order filed against Ben in the fourth judicial district court in and for Utah County, state of Utah by the judge Tony F. Graph Jr., which is just essentially restraining order saying things like plaintiffs are suffering and will continue to suffer immediate and irreparable injury before this action can be fully heard as set forth in the verified complaint in motion, including loss of business, loss of goodwill, loss of existing and future relationships. essentially saying that if this restraining order does not go through, they or their businesses will suffer major injuries, saying things like trespassing, stalking, intimidation and other unlawful conduct set forth in the verified complaints is prevented.

[00:24:52]But there's a lot there. This Reddit post will also be linked in the description that has all the public info, so feel free to check that out if you'd like. Dexter also posts about the situation on their page, saying YouTuber Reckless Ben was arrested and his Airbnb was searched while investigating a disputed $200,000 Lego Star Wars collection. Police say they were investigating allegations of stalking and targeted residential picketing rather than the missing Lego dispute.

[00:25:14]And Scopy says even though he has a full proof and evidence against the said charges, the police even went far enough as to cut parts of their police cam out so they wouldn't let people know they knew what he was doing is legal and still arrested him. And Gourd says, "And when Ben found the original redacted audio and it was two cops admitting he wasn't doing anything illegal, he called the police department and a woman cop lied to his face and told him that never happened." And Scopy says, "Yep, this is just a huge issue." All because it's a Mormon community and the cops are trying to help the Mormons. I hope every last one of those cops and that lady and the dude who stole everything all get in massive trouble. You believe I'm here says the kid has his heart in the right place, but excessively talking to the police and trying to reason with him with no lawyer present is stupid. I hope the family gets their money or sets back and the police officers are held accountable along with Bam and Lego for not stepping in, but the kid needs to get a lawyer. Ellie replies to Dexter by saying, "A $200,000 Lego Star Wars dispute isn't what got him an Airbnb raid. The stalking and residential picketing charges did." And you believe I'm here says, "Nobody gets raided for setting up signs." Einstein mental box says the stalking in question was attempts to serve him papers in person as was legally required by the way. Mr. Randroth says, "So a girl can have a stalker sending her death threats, harassing her, etc. with proofs, his contact details, all things ready and police does nothing. But a guy investigates a $200k dollar theft and cops are masters of stalker busters all of a sudden and la says it was an elderly man who was caught and the cops were protecting the thief. Now more updates for the story are constantly coming out. The police department has responded to the second part of the series as well. The one that arrested Ben and now Ben has also responded back to them. Subscribe down below for more updates on all of the internet's reactions to this whole story breaking.

[00:26:54]But for now, shout out to our tier three members, internet representatives, Aiko, Salad, Cotus, as Bandido, Captain Crash, shout out to Dear Boy, Noobster, and Mr. X.