Mitchell Taebel was arrested and charged on June 2, 2023, with stalking, intimidation, invasion of privacy, and harassment of singer Taylor Swift and her management team, according to LaPorte County (Indiana) Jail and LaPorte Superior Court records. He allegedly committed several violations between March and May 2023.
Even when controlling for the fact that the rate of violence against celebrities is very low (probably because of their security) and articulated/explicit threats by stalkers do not predict future violence (when the stalker’s victim is not a former intimate partner), at least eight of his behaviors and characteristics concern me. In descending order of my concerns:
Security Breaches/Proximity Seeking. A stalker’s attempted or actual physical approaches to the victim do not necessarily mean that the stalker is on the pathway to violence against the victim. In fact, most stalkers who approach public figures do not intend harm to the public figure. But such approaches can result in emotional distress to the victim and appearing at the victim’s home (or work) does pose a risk of violence.
- On May 5, Taebel allegedly traveled from his home in Long Beach, Indiana, to breach outer security at Swift’s luxury condominium in Nashville, Tennessee. He allegedly snuck through an unsecured door but was stopped in the lobby by security. After telling security staff that he was a “great-looking, well-dressed, popular TV host,” he allegedly asked if Swift was in her top-floor penthouse, and if she was, to let her know he was in the lobby. His seven-hour journey from his home to Swift’s residence indicates a willingness to expend significant time, effort, and possibly resources to make a physical approach.
- After Taebel was ordered off the condominium property, he circumvented Swift’s concert security at Nissan Stadium Special Events by having a ticket “transferred to him via a third-party channel,” according to news reporting on court documents. He had been placed on a security threat/concern list that prevented him from buying concert tickets — commendable, proactive threat management by the security team. He allegedly made his way to the proximity of the VIP area before personnel in Swift’s management company identified him. He was escorted out of the venue. A week later, he was served with a restraining order.
History of Criminal Violence. Generally, prior criminal history has not been shown to increase the risk of stalking violence. However, history of violence is one of the best predictors of future violence. And some studies find that people who threaten, approach, or attack public figures tend to have violent and nonviolent criminal histories. I consider three of Taebel’s incidents to be concerning indicators because of their violence and physical recklessness:
- His reckless disregard for the safety of others during a January 2018 high-speed chase across the Phoenix area after a police traffic stop. The chase ended after he ran a red light, drove into oncoming traffic, and collided head-on with an SUV. Taebel was charged with aggravated assault with a deadly weapon, unlawful flight from a law enforcement vehicle, and endangerment. The charges were later dismissed due to mental incompetence, according to court records.
- In 2017 he was charged with “felony of assault in Las Vegas,” as he claimed in letters to multiple politicians asking for their help. Court records reportedly detail his assault on a corrections officer who tried to move him to a different section of the booking area because he was not cooperating. This is likely the source of the felony assault charge.
- In 2011 Taebel was arrested for assaulting a doorman while trying to enter his girlfriend’s luxury high-rise apartment building in Manhattan. He repeatedly punched the doorman who attempted to deny him entry to the elevator. The doorman required surgery to his eye socket. In 2013 a jury found Taebel guilty of third-degree assault and attempted second-degree assault, and he was sentenced to six months of imprisonment and five years of probation.
Of note, court documents related to his 2013 arrest reportedly claim Taebel was expelled from Arizona State University for “seriously disruptive and odd behavior.” And a court document that Taebel filed in a 2020 complaint against the University of Virginia claims that in 2007 he was unlawfully “expelled after taking bread from the pantry.” Additional details on these claimed expulsions could inform protective intelligence and a behavioral threat assessment of Taebel.
Fixation. Fixation is common among those who stalk and or attack public figures (and among targeted attackers in general). This warning behavior is an increasingly pathological preoccupation with a person or a cause, accompanied by a deterioration in social and/or occupational life. It is not clear to me if a deterioration in his social and/or occupational life occurred as a result of his fixation on Taylor Swift, but I consider it possible. He allegedly violated the restraining order served to him in mid-May by continuing to post numerous videos and posts about Swift and tagging her in all his posts and videos.
His YouTube channel has two playlists with over 200 videos total. By my count, roughly 80 percent of the videos are of Swift or relate to her (including videos from Swift’s YouTube channel he added to his playlists). One of his videos is a 12-hour video that he produced. In his videos he can be seen in various bars and establishments declaring his love for Swift and discussing his plans to marry her.
In my opinion, his fixation also included numerous communications directed at and related to Swift (discussed below).
Mental Illness and Delusions. The mentally ill are far more likely to be victims of violence instead of perpetrators of crime. And despite the fact that the general public, members of the news media, and almost all politicians blame violence and especially mass shootings on mental illness, the overwhelming majority of these perpetrators do not have mental issues beyond what every person reading this newsletter experiences any given day. However, in terms of people who stalk and attack public figures, various studies have found a strong correlation with mental illness — including delusional thinking. Delusional beliefs might motivate stalking. In fact, Lorraine Sheridan, one of the world’s foremost experts on stalking, has found that celebrity stalkers are much more likely to be delusional than stalkers of non-celebrities.
Taebel’s probable delusion in regard to Swift is apparent from at least August 26, 2022, when he posted a video on YouTube titled “CELEBRITY MITCH TAEBEL AND TAYLOR SWIFT ARE GETTING MARRIED INTRO!!!”. Recorded in a bar, he claims he “proposed to Taylor Swift everybody. She’s gonna say yes; I’m getting married. She’s my soul mate. We’re both celebrities.” In several of his other videos, he also refers to himself as a celebrity. And as previously mentioned, charges from his near-fatal car chase in Arizona were later dismissed due to mental incompetence, according to court records.
Communications. Extensive and diverse communications have been associated with stalking persistence and recidivism involving the same victim, including public figures. By my count, and based only on reported court documents, between March and May 2023 Taebel allegedly left/posted at least 20 (likely far more) voicemails, messages, social media posts, and phone calls directed at and related to Swift. Recipients of these communications allegedly included Swift, her father, governors’ offices in several states, and her management company 13 Management. A study that analyzed the largest celebrity stalker sample worldwide identified that when stalking escalates (e.g., increased frequency and intensity of communications), there tends to be a dramatic increase in the likelihood of an approach to the celebrity. Taebel’s approach allegedly occurred during the aforementioned attempt to meet Swift at her home and after much of the aforementioned flurry of communications by him.
Possible Leakage. During his arraignment and at a subsequent press conference, Taebel stated he had the right to take a police officer’s life if an arrest attempt was made and he would not obey any rules or laws imposed on his freedom (this statement was not related to Taylor Swift). I wonder if this statement can be considered “leakage,” which is communication to a third party of an intent to do harm to a target. Although all direct threats should be taken seriously, far more incidents of leakage than direct threats are linked to actual violence, based on empirical data.
Sovereign Citizen. “Sovereign citizens” believe that federal, state, and local governments operate illegally. The Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) considers sovereign-citizen extremists as comprising a domestic terrorist movement. Terry Nichols, who helped plan the 1995 Oklahoma City bombing, was a member of the movement. Although often mistaken for the militia movement and groups, sovereign citizen ideology often does overlap with other far-right extremist groups. During either the 2018 police traffic stop that preceded the almost-catastrophic high-speed chase and/or in his 911 call during the chase, Taebel apparently self-identified to law enforcement as a sovereign citizen. Based on his statements, his sovereign citizen ideology most likely prompted his attempted evasion of police and his belief that he had the right to take a police officer’s life. There is a proclivity for violence in the sovereign citizen movement.
- In 2013, a survey of law enforcement intelligence officers rated sovereign citizens as the top serious terrorist threat, higher than Islamic terrorists.
- Between 1983 and July 2020, there were 75 confirmed instances in which sovereign citizens attempted to harm or did harm law enforcement officers (LEOs); 27 LEOs were killed and an additional 65 LEOs were wounded.
- In 2022, the New Jersey Office of Homeland Security and Preparedness (NJOHSP) assessed that “anti-government extremists will likely continue to reject restrictions that prohibit them from owning, possessing in vehicles, and stockpiling firearms and ammunition.” NJOHSP highlighted three cases in 2022 in which sovereign citizens rejected government authority resulting in their arrests, additional criminal charges, and/or deadly confrontations with LEOs.
According to court records I found, Taebel was charged with resisting arrest without violence in December 2008 in Broward County, Florida, and also in May 2009 in Miami Dade County. However, the details of the charges in both counties are not clear.
Christine Sarteschi has written extensively on the sovereign citizen movement, including a blog on the movement and also a monograph published in 2020 that included a section on Taebel (i.e., 3 years prior to his arrest for stalking Taylor Swift).
His combined ignoring of legal constraints (in the form of violating his restraining order), disregard for and defiance of the law, his associated reckless disregard for the safety of others, and his sovereign citizen ideology are concerning.
Racism. After returning home from his unsuccessful attempts to meet Swift at her home and attend her concert, Taebel posted an Instagram video stating: “[Taylor Swift] had black woman as bell hop and she looked like Taylor Swift was definitely having sex with [omitted] Not just black people. Dirty flicking [omitted] We are talking like diseased fowl disgusting diseased [omitted] fiom New York City with HIV, all of which I’m sure is true.” “She had no idea white man would come in there and demand to talk to [Taylor Swift] like did.” As prejudice has served as the motivation for targeted violence by numerous individuals, Taebel’s alleged racism, when combined with the aforementioned warning behaviors, is concerning.
Implications
Professional, Collaborative Security and Management Teams. For public figures, the current disposition of Taebel’s case highlights the importance of talent management (for entertainers) and professional and trained security teams that coordinate collaborate with each other. Reportedly a restraining order against Taebel was requested, he was placed on a security threat/concern list that prevented him from buying concert tickets, and Swift’s management team recognized him when he was near the VIP area at the concert venue.
However, rising public figures are often not fortunate to have a professional and trained security team, if any security at all; they are accessible and famous enough to have legions of adoring fans and constituents but they do not have the funds to hire a professional security team. In terms of celebrities, I refer to this ironic phenomenon as the “rising celebrity security gap.” When I was chief of concert security during my senior year at my alma mater, a rapidly up-and-coming (and now internationally famous) singer did a meet-and-greet for fans that lasted a couple of hours. Security consisted of only me and my team (a good number of folks). But everything went well.
In June 2016 a fixated fan killed YouTuber, singer, and The Voice contestant Christina Grimmie as she held a post-concert meet and greet in Orlando, Florida (a failure of one my “3Ps” of concert and special event security: Protect the Performer). Her brother served as her band member, road manager, and security. He heroically tackled the killer, Kevin James Loibl, who managed to free himself and commit suicide with a second gun. Similar to Taebel’s fixation with Taylor Swift, Loibl displayed fixation warning behavior with Grimmie.
Protective Intelligence, Behavioral Threat Assessment, and Threat Management. In addition to Taebel’s fixation, this article detailed additional warning behaviors and characteristics that are apparent based solely on public documents and public statements. There are possibly additional indicators of his stalking and violence risk and even “buffers” against violence (coping strategies that might inhibit his violent behavior) that might be identified during additional searches into public records, legal discovery, trial, and psychological examination. Taebel’s case highlights the importance of behavioral threat assessments and management — not only for celebrity security teams, but for workplaces in general. In the context of stalking, a threat assessment should answer a few very specific questions, and those answers drive threat management.
There is a lot more to unpack about this stalking case, but the importance of professional, trained security and artist management teams, behavioral threat assessments, and threat management are arguably the most important takeaways. Ideally, a security team includes an intelligence section, the concept of which is increasing in use throughout the corporate world. But often, security intelligence is undervalued (possibly because the security intelligence teams are too narrowly focused on tactical issues), judging from the number of intelligence shops that corporations have downsized in recent years.
Similarly, while there has been an increase in the awareness of behavioral threat assessment, far too few security professionals are familiar with its basic concepts. Ill-advised threat management, including wasteful overreactions and preventable emotional distress of public figures, would be a best-case consequence to unfamiliarity with threat assessment and protective intelligence. Again, that would be a best-case consequence.
The views expressed here are the writer’s and are not necessarily endorsed by Homeland Security Today, which welcomes a broad range of viewpoints in support of securing our homeland. To submit a piece for consideration, email editor @ hstoday.us.
