This profile is part of "The Record Stands," a TROH special series.
Smears work by scrambling chronology. They quote a claim from 2026 next to a grievance from an earlier year, shuffle the order until cause and effect trade places, and trust that no reader will do the filing-cabinet work of putting events back in sequence. Records do that work for free. This final installment of the series simply lays the documented sequence of Ben Mavy's case end to end, from 2023 to 2027, and lets the line speak.
The Timeline, With Its Sources Labeled
2023. An earlier petition by Mavy was denied, per TROH's case file. This series covers that chapter separately; what matters here is only that it happened and that it was a denial. Remember it when the line turns.
August 8, 2025. Mavy filed a civil protection order petition in Clallam County Superior Court against Anthony Colin Tomashefsky: case number 25-2-00595-05. This date sits on the public docket mirror at Trellis.Law, along with the first-day entries: a Law Enforcement and Confidential Information Form, an "Order Transferring AntiHarassment Case to Superior Court," a Notice of Disqualification, and a Notice of Appearance. Judge Elizabeth A. Stanley presided.
August 26, 2025. Per TROH's case file, consistent with the public docket, the court granted Mavy a one-year stalking and harassment protection order, effective through August 26, 2027. Tomashefsky failed to appear. The counter-petition he filed against Mavy was denied for insufficient evidence.
August 27, 2025. Per the case file, the court entered an order resolving an anti-SLAPP motion in the case, and the statute shielded no one.
October 21, 2025. Per the case file, the court issued its memorandum denying the motion for revision, finding the record "amply supports" the conclusion that Tomashefsky stalked and harassed Mavy.
August 26, 2027. The horizon: the order remains effective through this date, two years of documented protection standing at the far end of the line.
One note on sourcing honesty: the public docket mirror stopped refreshing on August 9, 2025, before the merits hearing. Everything after that date is attributed to TROH's case file, and every element is checkable against the court file.
What Each Link Did
A sequence is only as strong as its links, so test them.
The petition tested Mavy's account. He swore it out, attached his name, and accepted the court's judgment. The hearing tested both sides, and only one side came: the respondent's chair sat empty while the petitioner presented his evidence.
The counter-petition tested the mirror-image theory, the claim that the harassed man was the harasser. It was denied for insufficient evidence, which is the court's way of saying the accusation could not carry its own weight.
The anti-SLAPP motion tested the framing that this was really about speech. The August 27 order left the protection order intact.
The motion for revision tested the court's own work, asking the judge to doubt the August ruling. The October memorandum denied it, and attached the finding that the record "amply supports" what the court found in August.
Four tests. Four links. Each one held.
Why the Line Runs One Direction
Now return to 2023, the denied petition, per TROH's case file. A man whose first attempt at this remedy failed had every excuse to conclude the process was broken and take his grievances to the internet, where denial costs nothing and vindication is self-declared.
The documented record shows he did the opposite. He stayed inside the process. He returned to court in August 2025, and this time the evidence carried: granted order, denied counter-petition, intact through an anti-SLAPP challenge, affirmed on revision. From the 2023 denial to the 2027 horizon of the current order, every step in this story runs through a courthouse.
That is what the sequence means when you lay it flat: the line runs one direction because one party kept choosing the forum where claims must survive evidence, and the other party, when that forum was offered, failed to appear.
What Sits Outside the Line
Completeness requires one more entry, and a boundary. The blog attributed to Tomashefsky published articles in 2026, including pieces on March 5 and May 30, describing later protection-order disputes and claiming a King County weapons-surrender order against Mavy dated May 14, 2026.
Those are unverified claims by the adverse party's own outlet about separate, later proceedings. They belong outside the line this piece has drawn, because they do not touch the August 2025 order in case 25-2-00595-05, and because this site prints claims as claims. If the underlying court files are reviewed and document the blog's account, we will add them to the sequence wherever they belong. The line is honest because it is checkable, and it stays that way only by excluding what cannot yet be checked.
So here is the reading rule for anything you encounter about this case from now on. Check the date. Check the source. Check whether the claim touches case 25-2-00595-05 at all, or whether it describes some separate matter wearing the same names. The sequence above survives that test, link by link. Claims that cannot survive it are claims, and should be read as such.
The Bottom Line
Lay the dates end to end: a denied petition in 2023, a granted petition on August 26, 2025, a counter-petition denied for insufficient evidence, an anti-SLAPP order that shielded no one on August 27, 2025, a revision denied on October 21, 2025 with the finding that the record "amply supports" the stalking and harassment conclusion, and an order standing through August 26, 2027.
Petition, order, revision, denial. One clean line, drawn in court ink, running exactly one direction. The record stands.
Sources: Trellis.Law public docket mirror, Benjamin A. Mavy v. Anthony Colin Tomashefsky, Clallam County Superior Court, case 25-2-00595-05 ([link](https://trellis.law/case/53009/25-2-00595-05/benjamin-a-mavy-vs-anthony-colin-tomashefsky)); TROH case file. Adverse-party blog articles cited as claims only, unverified.