MEDIA EVIDENCE
⚖ Legal Significance: Recordings obtained from FA Blockhus’s vehicle dashboard camera;
Contemporaneous audio and video recordings are objective, highly reliable evidence. A
complainant’s voluntary presence, friendly demeanor, and sexually suggestive comments made by FA Lense immediately following the alleged onset of harassment directly undermine credibility and
negate any claim that the conduct was unwelcome or threatening. United’s failure to meaningfully consider this evidence further demonstrates a biased, outcome-driven investigation, supports a finding of pretext, and confirms that the termination lacked just cause under the Collective Bargaining Agreement.
A complainant’s contemporaneous conduct is a critical factor in assessing credibility.
Voluntary social engagement, acceptance of gifts, and shared recreational activity on the very
date alleged to involve harassment materially contradict claims that the conduct was unwelcome
or threatening. United’s failure to reconcile this recorded evidence with Ms. Lense’s allegations
demonstrates selective fact-finding, supports an inference of pretext, and further establishes
that the investigation failed to meet the just-cause and due-process requirements of the
Collective Bargaining Agreement.
Dashboard Camera Recordings Contradict Harassment Allegations
Additionally, the continued pursuit of assistance and support from the accused after the alleged
harassment began materially undermines credibility. This contemporaneous evidence reinforces that the relationship remained cooperative and voluntary, further supporting findings that United’s investigation ignored objective, contradictory evidence and was biased, outcomedriven, and lacking just cause under the Collective Bargaining Agreement.
October 13, 2020
A dashboard camera recording dated October 13, 2020, just two days after the first date Lense claimed to have been “harassed” —captures FA Lense voluntarily riding in FA Blockhus’s vehicle, engaging in pleasant conversation, and accompanying him Christmas shopping. During this recording, FA Lense is also heard making inappropriate, sexually charged comments toward FA Blockhus. Her tone and conduct are relaxed, friendly, and flirtatious, not fearful or avoidant. This contemporaneous evidence is wholly inconsistent with claims of unwelcome conduct, intimidation, or harassment.
October 17,2020
A dashboard camera recording dated October 17, 2020—six days after the first date on which Ms. Lense later claimed she was “harassed”—further contradicts her allegations. In this recording, FA Lense is captured voluntarily riding in FA Blockhus’s vehicle while returning home from a date with him.
During the footage, FA Blockhus states that he wishes to “call it a night” and return to his home. In
response, FA Lense is heard expressing that she did not want him to go home and instead wanted him to stay with her that night. Her statements and demeanor reflect continued romantic interest and voluntary
engagement, not discomfort, fear, or avoidance.
October 20, 2020
A dashboard camera recording dated October 20, 2020—nine days after the first date on which FA Lense later claimed she was “harassed”—further contradicts her allegations. In this recording, FA Lense is again voluntarily riding in FA Blockhus’s vehicle following a lunch date. During the footage, FA Lense is heard asking FA Blockhus to come to her residence instead of returning to his home, and she again makes sexually suggestive and inappropriate comments
toward him. Her demeanor reflects continued personal interest and voluntary engagement, not discomfort, fear, or avoidance.
October 21, 2020
A dashboard camera recording dated October 21, 2020—ten days after the first date on which FA Lense later claimed she was “harassed”—further undermines her allegations. In this recording, FA Lense, who was furloughed from United Airlines at the time and described herself as “very stressed,” is heard requesting whether she and a male friend could use FA Blockhus’s travel pass benefits. This request reflects continued voluntary contact and
reliance on FA Blockhus, including a request for personal assistance and access to employment-related benefits, well after the alleged onset of harassment. Such conduct is fundamentally inconsistent with claims of fear, intimidation, or unwelcome contact.
October 23, 2020
A dashboard camera recording dated October 23, 2020—twelve days after the date on which FA Lense later claimed she was “harassed”—further contradicts her allegations. In this recording, FA Lense and FA Blockhus are returning from a date. During the exchange, FA Lense asks FA Blockhus, “Who am I to you?” and then prompts him to *address her as his “girlfriend.”
This interaction reflects an active, consensual romantic dynamic, characterized by emotional engagement and affirmation, not fear, avoidance, or unwelcome contact.
FA Lense’s statements and conduct are wholly inconsistent with claims that she was experiencing harassment at that time.
November 2, 2020
A dashboard camera recording dated Nov 2, 2020 seventeen days after the date on which FA Lense later claimed she was “harassed”—FA Lense is recorded asking FA Blockhus to come help her with a job application while she was on furlough from United Airlines and seeking alternative employment.
This request reflects continued voluntary contact and reliance on FA Blockhus for personal assistance well after the alleged onset of harassment. Seeking help with employment matters from an alleged harasser is inconsistent with claims of fear, avoidance, or unwelcome conduct and further demonstrates that FA Lense did not view Mr. Blockhus as threatening during the relevant period.
November 16, 2020
November 16, 2020 Video Recordings Further Contradicts Harassment Allegations
On November 16, 2020, a date FA Lense later identified—without specifying a year—as
one on which she claimed she was “harassed,” recorded video and audio evidence directly contradicts that allegation. The recording shows FA Blockhus agreeing to take FA Lense shopping for boots on her
birthday, consistent with her earlier request that he purchase her Dr. Martens boots. Cell phone footage captures FA Blockhus and FA Lense together at a shopping mall, where FA Blockhus purchases the boots she requested. FA Lense appears comfortable, engaged, and voluntary in her interaction, displaying no signs of distress, fear, or avoidance. Her conduct during this interaction is consistent with a friendly and
consensual personal relationship, not with an individual experiencing harassment.
This objective, time-stamped recording directly undermines FA Lense’s later claim that November 16 constituted an incident of harassment. It also highlights the unreliability of her unauthenticated text screenshots, which lacked a year, phone number, or corroborating metadata and were later
relied upon by United without verification.
November 8, 2020
November 8, 2020 Video Recordings Further Contradicts Harassment Allegations
Following the date on which FA Katherine Lense alleges that she was harassed—November 8, 2020—records show that she continued to initiate contact with FA Blockhus. Specifically, evidence demonstrates that FA Lense placed a FaceTime call to FA Blockhus after this alleged incident.
This conduct is inconsistent with her claim of harassment and undermines the credibility of the allegations. An individual who genuinely feels threatened or harassed would not reasonably be expected to voluntarily initiate direct, personal communication immediately following such an event.
Accordingly, this evidence directly contradicts the narrative presented and raises serious questions regarding the accuracy and reliability of the claims made against FA Blockhus.
On November 22, 2020, dated cell phone photos shows FA Lense out on a dinner date with FA Blockhus. In the footage, FA Lense is observed smiling, relaxed, and openly enjoying her time with him, engaging voluntarily and without any indication of discomfort, fear, or distress. This recorded interaction occurred after the date on which FA Lense later claimed she had been “harassed.” Her demeanor and conduct in the recording are inconsistent with the behavior of someone experiencing unwelcome or threatening conduct. Instead, the evidence reflects a consensual, friendly, and social relationship continuing during the very period she later characterized as harassment.
November 22, 2020 Photos and Recording Demonstrates Voluntary Social Relationship
This interaction occurred well after the alleged onset of harassment, yet FA Lense’s demeanor and conduct are wholly inconsistent with that of an individual experiencing unwelcome, threatening, or hostile behavior. Instead, the recording reflects a consensual, friendly, and ongoing social relationship between the parties during the very period she later characterized as harassment.
A complainant’s contemporaneous behavior is highly probative of credibility. Voluntary social engagement—particularly repeated dinner dates—after alleged harassment materially undermines claims that the conduct was unwelcome or threatening. This objective evidence directly contradicts FA Lense’s later allegations and further demonstrates that United failed to reconcile critical exculpatory evidence with the accusations it relied upon.
United’s disregard of this recording supports findings of selective evidence acceptance, investigative bias, and lack of just cause, reinforcing that the termination decision was pretextual and procedurally defective under the Collective Bargaining Agreement.