Premium Only Content

Guilty of Arson & Fraud on Public
GoFundMe Request Based on Fake Claim of Racial AnimusÂ
Post 5199
An Attempt to Profit the Public by Setting Fire to his Own Food Truck Fails
Avonte Ahikim Hartsfield burned down his own food truck and falsely reported that he was the victim of arson in October 2021. He then created a GoFundMe campaign titled "Rebuilding After a Series of Hate Crimes," claiming he was a victim of hate crimes and arson. The campaign raised $102,276 from more than 2,000 donors.
In The People v. Avonte Ahikim Hartsfield, D084114, California Court of Appeals, Fourth District, First Division (September 24, 2025) affirmed the conviction.
FACTS
Investigation and Evidence:
The fire department and police conducted investigations and found that the fire was intentionally set by an open flame. Surveillance footage placed Hartsfield near the scene at the time of the fire. Hartsfield's claims of being a victim of hate crimes were found to be false.
Legal Proceedings:
Hartsfield was charged with arson, insurance fraud, presenting a false claim to insurance, presenting false information supporting an insurance claim, and grand theft. He was convicted of all charges and sentenced to five years and four months in prison.
LAW
Grand Theft by False Pretenses:
To prove theft by false pretenses the prosecution must show that the defendant made a false pretense or representation to the owner of property with the intent to defraud, and the owner transferred the property in reliance on the misrepresentation. The misrepresentation must materially influence the owner to hand over the property, but it does not need to be the only reason for the transfer.
Substantial Evidence Supported the Conviction for Grand Theft by False Pretenses
The court concluded that there was substantial evidence to support the reasonable inference that donors gave money to Hartsfield in reliance on his false representations about being a victim of arson and a hate crime. The jury could reasonably infer that donors were materially influenced by Hartsfield's false pretense.
Substantial evidence includes circumstantial evidence and any reasonable inferences that can be drawn from the evidence. The appellate court concluded that there was substantial evidence to support a reasonable inference that donors transferred funds in reliance on Hartsfield's misrepresentation that he was an arson victim.
The Court of Appeals considered that substantial evidence includes circumstantial evidence and any reasonable inferences that can be taken from the evidence. To prove theft by false pretenses under section 484, the People must show:
 the defendant made a false pretense or representation to the owner of property;
with the intent to defraud the owner of that property; and
the owner transferred the property to the defendant in reliance on the representation
The Court of Appeals concluded it was reasonable for the jury to infer donors gave money in direct response to Hartsfield's seemingly substantiated and highly sympathetic plea for help to recover from arson. He supported his arson claims with photos of the burnt truck, which provided the public a basis for believing Hartsfield was telling the truth about the fire. Also, the Court of Appeals concluded that it defied logic to suggest donors would have given him money exclusively for reasons other than his shocking story of a racially motivated arson with a noose left behind as some kind of message of hate.
Because there was substantial evidence to support the reasonable inference that donors gave money to Hartsfield in reliance on his false representations about being a victim of arson and a hate crime.
ZALMA OPINION
Arson is a violent form of fraud. Firefighters and nearby people are injured and die in arson fires. Mr. Hartsfield defrauded the public by claiming he was the victim of a hate crime and not only sought to profit the value of his food truck from his insurer he begged the public to pay him as the victim of racists when, in truth, he actually set the fire himself. He will serve the full sentence rendered and be required to pay restitution to those he defrauded.
(c) 2025 Barry Zalma & ClaimSchool, Inc.
Please tell your friends and colleagues about this blog and the videos and let them subscribe to the blog and the videos.
Subscribe to my substack at https://barryzalma.substack.com/subscribe
Go to X @bzalma; Go to Barry Zalma videos at Rumble.com at https://rumble.com/account/content?type=all; Go to Barry Zalma on YouTube- https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCysiZklEtxZsSF9DfC0Expg; Go to the InsuranceClaims Library – https://lnkd.in/gwEYk.
-
7:48
Insurance Law
13 days agoUntrue Application for Insurance Voids Policy
241 -
LIVE
Timcast
1 hour agoSupreme Court Justices TARGETED By Leftist In Foiled Terrorist ATTACK
20,801 watching -
LIVE
Steven Crowder
3 hours ago🔴Pillaging America: Lefty Celebs Prove Exactly Why Every Illegal Must Get Out
29,220 watching -
LIVE
Dr Disrespect
1 hour ago🔴LIVE - DR DISRESPECT - BLACK OPS 7 - BANG BANG BANG
1,104 watching -
LIVE
vivafrei
4 hours agoViva & Barnes Live with The Duran - World Politics, World News, & World War?
1,707 watching -
LIVE
Tim Young
46 minutes agoShutdown Special LIVE w/ 19 members of Congress! Powered by @Kalshi
21 watching -
1:05:29
The Rubin Report
1 hour agoFight Over Trump Lies Gets so Ugly It Could Be Eric Trump’s Final Appearance on This Show
4.92K14 -
1:32:12
Nikko Ortiz
2 hours agoRealistic COP Simulator | Rumble LIVE
5.71K -
LIVE
LFA TV
13 hours agoLIVE & BREAKING NEWS! | WEDNESDAY 10/8/25
4,244 watching -
LIVE
The Mel K Show
1 hour agoMORNINGS WITH MEL K -Lobbyists and Greed have Replaced the Will of We the People 10-8-25
579 watching