Rosanna Pansino claims she recently reported fellow YouTuber MrBeast FBI it is unlikely to lead to an investigation, legal experts said Newsweek.

On Sunday, Pansino — who made a name for herself cooking on YouTube, where she has more than 14 million subscribers — shared a more than 7-minute video pretending to show messages exchanged between MrBeast and his employees.

In an accompanying caption and subsequent posts about X, previously Twittershe suggested that the Telegram “company chat logs” in question indicated that MrBeast — whose real name is Jimmy Donaldson — was aware of the impropriety.

Frequent MrBeast collaborator Ava Kris Tyson faced off in July control over her group chat interactions online with someone using the social media handle LavaGS, which started when he was 13 and Tyson was 20.

While Tyson insisted in a statement to X that he “never groomed anyone,” LavaGS, now 20, said people suggesting such actions by the content creator are telling “massive lies ” and “turn the truth”.

“Ava never did anything bad and only made a few edgy jokes,” LavaGS wrote on the platform. “I have never been exploited or taken advantage of.”

For his part, MrBeast — who holds the record for the most subscribers on YouTube with more than 320 million followers at the time of writing — said in a statement to X that he hired “an independent third party to conduct an thorough investigation to make sure I have all the facts.” It was also announced at the time that Tyson was no longer part of MrBeast’s platform.

Over the weekend, Pansino — who has emerged as a frequent critic of MrBeast — shared footage of what she described as messages showing discussions of “many inappropriate topics” between the YouTuber and employees, including Tyson. Pansino later said in a separate X post that she “reported what I found and my concerns to @FBI authorities.”

When reached by email, an FBI representative said Newsweek that the agency “had no comment.” Newsweek also reached out to representatives for MrBeast and Pansino via email and Tyson via social media for comment.

In response to Pansino’s suggestions, six legal experts shared their thoughts Newsweek if they believe her claims will lead to an FBI investigation.

Bill Ogden, Attorney — Farrar & Ball LLP

“The FBI will do what it does best – investigate. If he discovers any concrete evidence of Mr. Beast’s personal wrongdoing, he will deal with it. Yes, these conversations were private and not intended for public viewing, but the damage is done. and that bell cannot be rung.

“After reviewing Ms. Pansino’s post on X, I see a mountain of unflattering content. However, from what has been shared, nothing appears to meet the threshold for federal criminal culpability. If the FBI decides to launch a full investigation, they will have access to much more than what Ms. Pansino posted To be clear, we do not have the full context or ages of those involved in the chat and the FBI would certainly look deeper if they choose to continue.

“It should be noted that earlier this month, Pansino expressed her frustration with Mr. Beast, claiming he edited her out of a YouTube video.

“Criminal charges may not come into play, but we cannot ignore the consequences in the court of public opinion. Dr. Disrespect – a top streamer – was suddenly banned from Twitch after allegations of inappropriate messages surfaced. It’s a reminder that reputations don’t “fall necessarily from the rule of law, but from the weight of scrutiny.”

Craig Greening, Solicitor — Greening Law Group

“On the surface, this case does not appear to meet the threshold for federal criminal violations, which makes the likelihood of FBI action quite low.

“In general, chat logs do not trigger a federal investigation unless there is clear evidence of criminal activity. In any case, MrBeast could face civil liability, especially if the logs suggest knowledge of unsolved misconduct, potentially exposing him to claims of negligent supervision.

“That said, if Pansino accessed MrBeast’s chat logs without authorization, it could introduce a federal felony charge on her part, depending on how she obtained the evidence.”

Nicole Brenecki, lawyer — Jodré Brenecki LLP

“If the internal messages were simply exchanges of offensive content and there were no actual victims, children or otherwise, the FBI would likely take no action. Acts are punishable, unlike “freedom of speech”, regardless of their interpretation.

“However, the brand can quickly lose popularity because the court of public opinion is much stricter and can elevate a brand in expressing ideas instead of committing acts.”

David M. Schwartz, attorney

“First, it’s not clear that MrBeast is part of the chat, or that his company oversees or in any way created the environment for the chat. Second, the company could be civilly liable for various labor violations, including harassment, sexual harassment, and hostile work environment.

“I (don’t) see any type of criminal liability from these chats, except for the person who sent sexually explicit material (depicting) a minor, if that happened at all.”

Russel Morgan, Attorney — Morgan Legal Group

“The FBI would have to find out if any federal laws were broken or if crimes occurred across state lines to determine if any of the charges fall under their jurisdiction. If chat logs reveal exploitation, cyber crimes, or any other federal crime. , they can choose to intervene.

“However, if they only see evidence of workplace misconduct or negligence, any criminal charges or lawsuits will be pursued at the state or civil court level.

“If MrBeast knew about employee misconduct and turned a blind eye, he could face a civil lawsuit where he could have to pay damages to those who were harmed by his negligence.

“If he had taken it a step further and concealed or participated in any criminal activity, then he could face criminal charges. It’s all speculation at this point and we won’t know until more evidence comes out.”

Arash Hashemi, Attorney — Law Office of Arash Hashemi

“Given the information, the likelihood that the FBI will take action depends on several factors. First, the FBI would have to determine that there is credible evidence of federal violations, such as fraud or harassment.

“If the chat logs indicate that MrBeast was aware of serious misconduct by his employees – specifically any criminal activity or violation of federal employment laws – then the FBI may investigate. a significant impact on the public.

“In terms of legal implications, if the chat logs contain evidence that MrBeast knowingly allowed illegal behavior to continue, he could be liable for failing to take corrective action. This could mean civil suits for negligence or creating a hostile work environment, depending on the specifics of what is documented.

“On the criminal side, liability would depend on the nature and gravity of the alleged misconduct; mere knowledge of a problem does not necessarily translate into criminal liability unless there was active involvement or a clear obligation to report it”.