The allegations made against FA Blockhus are not supported by a consistent or reliable factual record. To the contrary, substantial evidence directly contradicts the claims presented and raises serious concerns regarding the credibility of FA Katherine Lense.

First, FA Lense’s own conduct following the date of the alleged harassment undermines her claims. Despite asserting that she was harassed once on or about October 13, and once on November, 2020, records show that she continued to initiate contact with FA Blockhus, over 500 times, between October 2020-Feb 2021 including placing multiple FaceTime call to him after the alleged incident. Such behavior is inconsistent with that of an individual who genuinely believed herself to be threatened or harassed and directly contradicts the narrative relied upon by United (Jr. employee Frank Hester).

Second, FA Blockhus was awarded a two-year protection order against FA Lense based on findings of harassment. This judicial determination establishes that FA Lense, not FA Blockhus, engaged in conduct warranting legal protection. In addition, security camera footage captured FA Lense vandalizing FA Blockhus’s vehicle by slashing its tires. This documented conduct demonstrates a pattern of hostility and harassment directed toward FA Blockhus and is fundamentally inconsistent with her claims.

Further, FA Lense violated the terms of the protection order by continuing to engage in prohibited conduct directed at FA Blockhus. Such violations reflect a disregard for judicial authority and reinforce a continuing pattern of behavior that undermines the reliability of her allegations.

Additionally, recorded conversations exist that directly contradict FA Lense’s testimony and call into question the accuracy and completeness of her statements. These recordings provide objective evidence that her account of events is materially inconsistent with the actual facts.

Taken together, this evidence demonstrates a clear pattern of contradictory conduct, misrepresentation, and disregard for legal boundaries. Rather than supporting the allegations made against FA Blockhus, the record reflects that FA Lense’s claims are unreliable and not supported by objective evidence.

Despite these substantial credibility issues, United (Jr. employee Frank Hester) relied heavily—if not exclusively—on FA Lense’s unverified allegations while disregarding contrary evidence. This selective reliance further underscores the one-sided and unreliable nature of the investigation.

Accordingly, the credibility of the claims against FA Blockhus is fundamentally undermined, and any conclusions drawn from such claims cannot be considered reliable or supported by the full evidentiary record.