Sarah/Grooming

September 16, 2017: Sarah Rejects an Allegation Involving a 14-Year-Old

In a September 16, 2017 Twitter exchange, Sarah stated that Greg would have been “disgusted” by conduct involving a 14-year-old and said the person making the allegation was lying.

In this Twitter direct-message exchange, an Onision detractor known as “The Josh” asks Sarah why she does not believe a source making an allegation about Onision.

Sarah responds:

“Because I know Greg and he would not do that. A 14 year old? He would have been disgusted.”

She then adds:

“Whoever your source is is lying to you.”

What the message directly shows: At the time of this conversation, Sarah did not merely say that she was uncertain or lacked information. She affirmatively stated that, based on personally knowing Onision, she believed he would be disgusted by the idea of sexual conduct involving a 14-year-old. She also stated that the person supplying the allegation was lying.

Why it matters: This statement was made before Sarah’s later grooming allegations. It is relevant because it shows that Sarah’s expressed view at the time was that Onision was opposed to sexual involvement with minors and would not engage in the conduct being alleged. The defense contends that this materially conflicts with the later claim that Onision was grooming or sexually targeting minors.

Source: Twitter direct-message conversation dated September 16, 2017, between “The Josh” and Sarah.

In an October 1, 2018 message, Sarah acknowledges that Lucas did not return her romantic feelings and says she had known for two years that a relationship would not happen.

October 1, 2018: Sarah Describes Unreciprocated Romantic Feelings Toward Lucas

In this message, sent after Sarah had turned 18, Sarah tells Lucas that she understands he does not have romantic feelings for her.

Sarah writes:

“I’m not mad because you don’t have romantic feelings for me. It hurts but I know you have no control over that just like I have no control over my feelings.”

She also states:

“I’ve known nothing was ever going to happen for 2 years and I still stuck around because regardless of me being in love with you, you were always my best friend before anything else.”

Sarah explains that she had tried for years to overcome her feelings because preserving the friendship was important to her.

What the message directly shows: Sarah described herself as being in love with Lucas while acknowledging that Lucas did not return those romantic feelings. She also stated that she had believed for approximately two years that a relationship was not going to happen.

Why it matters: This message is relevant to the later grooming allegations because Sarah’s contemporaneous account describes the romantic interest as originating with her and being unreciprocated by Lucas. It also indicates that she expected rejection rather than believing that Lucas had promised, encouraged, or prepared her for a future romantic relationship.

Source: Text-message exchange dated October 1, 2018, between Sarah and Lucas.

October 1, 2018: Sarah States She Knew a Relationship With Lucas Was Never Going to Happen

In this message, Sarah explains that she had been in love with Lucas since she was 14 but kept those feelings secret because she believed revealing them could cause her to be removed from James and Lucas’s lives.

In an October 1, 2018 message, Sarah states that she had been in love with Lucas since age 14, knew a relationship would not happen, and says James repeatedly made that clear even after she turned 18.

Sarah writes:

“I have known for two years it was out of the question not just when I was 16/17 but even after I was 18.”

She then states:

“Greg made it painfully clear multiple times that pigs would fly before I would ever come close to having a chance with you even after my 18th birthday.”

Sarah also says:

“I stayed because you’re my best friend and I love you.”

She explains that she did not begin the friendship for romantic purposes and had originally planned to keep her feelings secret indefinitely.

What the message directly shows

Sarah states that her romantic feelings toward Lucas originated with her, remained unspoken for years, and were not reciprocated. She also states that James repeatedly made clear that a relationship with Lucas would not happen, including after Sarah became an adult.

Why it matters

This message directly contradicts the claim that James or Lucas were cultivating Sarah for a future romantic or sexual relationship. Sarah’s own contemporaneous account describes the opposite: she concealed her feelings, expected rejection, and understood that James firmly opposed the possibility of a relationship.

Source

Text-message exchange dated October 1, 2018, involving Sarah, Lucas, and James.

January 2019: Sarah Requests That James Sign the NDA

In this text-message exchange, Sarah actively discusses the proposed nondisclosure agreement and specifically says she needs James to sign one.

In January 2019, Sarah requested that James sign an NDA because he had “a fat mouth,” discussed adding a clause for her own peace of mind, and was told James wanted the agreement to be mutual.

Sarah writes:

“I think we should definitely think about adding that clause in there. You know... just for my peace of mind.”

She then jokes:

“totally professional intentions with this contract of course”

Sarah later states:

“but fr tho I need at least Greg to sign one bc he’s got a fat mouth”

Lucas responds that it was James’s idea for the agreement to be mutual.

What the messages directly show

Sarah was not passively presented with an agreement she knew nothing about. She participated in discussing its terms, wanted a particular clause added, and specifically requested that James sign because she was concerned he might reveal private information.

The exchange also shows that James proposed a mutual agreement, meaning the confidentiality obligations were intended to apply to both sides.

Why it matters

These messages directly contradict the later portrayal of the NDA as something created only by James and Lucas to silence Sarah. Sarah’s own words show that she wanted the agreement, discussed its contents, requested protection for her own “peace of mind,” and specifically wanted James legally bound to confidentiality.

The contemporaneous record shows Sarah treating the NDA as a mutual arrangement that would protect her as well.

Source

January 2019 text-message exchange between Sarah and Lucas.

January 7, 2019: Sarah Says She Would Have Realized It by Now If Lucas Were Grooming Her

On January 7, 2019, Sarah told Lucas that if he were grooming her, she would have already figured it out by then.

In this message, Sarah again rejects the claim that Lucas was grooming her.

Sarah writes:

“If you were grooming me I would've already figured it out by now lmao”

What the message directly shows

Sarah did not describe herself as confused, manipulated, or unsure about what was happening. Instead, she explicitly said that if Lucas had been grooming her, she would have recognized it already.

This was another direct denial made during the same January 2019 period in which Sarah repeatedly rejected the idea that Lucas had groomed her.

Why it matters

This message directly undermines Sarah’s later grooming allegations. Her own words show that, at the time, she did not believe she was being groomed and did not believe Lucas’s behavior fit that label.

It also reinforces the broader pattern in which Sarah repeatedly denied grooming, defended Lucas, and rejected attempts by others to characterize the relationship that way.

Source

January 7, 2019 text-message exchange between Sarah and Lucas, displayed from an iPhone conversation and photographed using an iPhone camera.

January 7, 2019: Sarah Swears She Was Not Groomed

On January 7, 2019, Sarah explicitly told Lucas, “I swear on my grandmother you did not groom me,” before following the statement with a joke.

In this message to Lucas, Sarah gives an explicit and emphatic denial that she was groomed.

Sarah writes:

“I swear on my grandmother you did not groom me.”

She then follows the statement with a joke:

“Would say my mother but...ya know 😂”

What the message directly shows

Sarah did not express uncertainty, confusion, or hesitation. She made a direct statement that Lucas did not groom her and reinforced that statement by swearing on her grandmother.

The casual joke immediately afterward also shows that this was written in Sarah’s ordinary conversational voice rather than as a formal statement drafted by someone else.

Why it matters

Sarah’s January 7, 2019 statement directly conflicts with her later portrayal of Lucas as someone who groomed her.

This is not a vague defense of Lucas or a statement that she simply did not recognize grooming at the time. Sarah specifically identifies the accusation and expressly denies that it happened.

The significance becomes even stronger when this message is considered alongside Sarah’s other statements from the same period repeatedly denying grooming and rejecting the label of “groomer.” Taken together, the messages show a consistent contemporaneous account that differs sharply from the allegations she later made publicly and in litigation.

Source

January 7, 2019 text-message exchange between Sarah and Lucas, displayed from an iPhone conversation and captured on a MacBook.

January 7, 2019: Sarah Says She Was Not Groomed and Calls the Accusation Insulting

In this message to Lucas, Sarah directly rejects the claim that she was groomed and explains why she did not believe the accusation reflected her own experience.

On January 7, 2019, Sarah stated that she would have raised grooming during a major fight if she believed it had occurred, but did not because she was not groomed.

Sarah writes:

“Well think about this...if I actually felt groomed I would have brought it up in our big fight. But I didn’t because I’m not groomed.”

She then adds:

“And her saying that I am even if you didn’t do it is actually really insulting.”

What the messages directly show

Sarah states plainly that she was not groomed. She also points to a prior major argument as a moment when she would have raised grooming if she genuinely believed it had occurred, but says she did not because that was not how she understood the relationship.

Sarah further describes another person’s attempt to label her as groomed as insulting, especially when Lucas had not committed the conduct being attributed to him.

Why it matters

This message shows that Sarah was not simply unaware of the grooming accusation. She considered it directly, rejected it based on her own experience, and objected to someone else imposing that identity on her.

Her statement is especially significant because she connects her denial to a real conflict in the relationship. According to Sarah, even during a major fight, she did not accuse Lucas of grooming because she did not believe she had been groomed.

This directly conflicts with her later characterization of the same relationship.

Source

January 7, 2019 text-message exchange between Sarah and Lucas, displayed from an iPhone conversation and captured on a MacBook.

January 7, 2019: Sarah Says She Recognized Grooming at Age 11 and That Lucas Did Not Groom Her

On January 7, 2019, Sarah stated that Lucas did not groom her, said she had recognized and reported an attempted groomer at age 11, and accused outsiders of twisting innocent events.

In this message to Lucas, Sarah states that she had previously recognized an actual grooming attempt when she was 11 years old and responded by fighting back and contacting police. On January 7, 2019, Sarah stated that Lucas did not groom her, said she had recognized and reported an attempted groomer at age 11, and accused outsiders of twisting innocent events.

Sarah writes:

“You didn’t groom me. I had a grown ass man attempt to actually groom me when I was 11 and once I caught on to what he was doing I clawed the fuck out of him and told the police. I don’t get groomed.”

She then says that Ayalla had attempted to pursue her while she was underage and criticizes outsiders for inventing or distorting private events:

“Nobody knows our business they just make shit up or take something that was innocent and twist it to fit their narrative.”

What the messages directly show On January 7, 2019, Sarah stated that Lucas did not groom her, said she had recognized and reported an attempted groomer at age 11, and accused outsiders of twisting innocent events.

Sarah explicitly states that Lucas did not groom her. She also presents herself as someone who already understood grooming from a prior experience, recognized it at a young age, resisted it, and reported it to police.

Sarah does not describe herself as confused about the meaning of grooming. She distinguishes Lucas from a person she says actually attempted to groom her and states plainly, “I don’t get groomed.”

Why it matters

This message sharply contradicts Sarah’s later claim that Lucas groomed her.

It is especially significant because Sarah does not merely deny the accusation. She explains that she had prior firsthand experience identifying grooming, understood what the conduct looked like, and believed Lucas had not done it.

Her statement that outsiders “make shit up” or twist innocent events to fit a narrative also shows that, at the time, Sarah believed the grooming story was being imposed on the relationship by other people rather than describing what she believed had actually happened.

Source

January 7, 2019 text-message exchange between Sarah and Lucas, displayed from an iPhone conversation and photographed using an iPhone camera.

January 8, 2019: Sarah Says Lucas Is Innocent and Is Not a Groomer

In this message, Sarah directly tells Lucas that he is innocent and says other people are attempting to convince him that he committed grooming when he did not.

On January 8, 2019, Sarah told Lucas that he was innocent, accused others of gaslighting him, and stated that groomers know what they are doing while Lucas had done nothing wrong.

Sarah writes:

“I’m sorry you really don’t deserve this. You know you’re innocent.”

She then states:

“They’re gaslighting you.”

Sarah further explains:

“They’re making you think you were doing something that you weren’t. Groomers know what they’re doing and they don’t feel guilty about it.”

What the messages directly show

Sarah described Lucas as innocent and specifically rejected the claim that he had groomed her. She stated that other people were gaslighting Lucas into believing he had committed conduct that, in her words, he had not committed.

Sarah also demonstrated that she understood grooming as deliberate behavior, stating that groomers know what they are doing and do not feel guilty about it. She applied that distinction directly to Lucas and concluded that he was not a groomer.

Why it matters

This was more than a general expression of support. Sarah expressly identified the grooming accusation, explained her understanding of what grooming involves, and stated that Lucas had not done it.

Her statement directly conflicts with her later allegations against Lucas. It also reinforces the previous day’s message in which she swore on her grandmother that Lucas did not groom her. Together, these exchanges show a repeated and clearly expressed contemporaneous position that Lucas was innocent and that the grooming narrative was being imposed on him by other people.

Source

January 8, 2019 text-message exchange between Sarah and Lucas, displayed from an iPhone conversation and photographed using an iPhone camera.

January 8, 2019: Sarah Introduces Sexual Terms While Negotiating the NDA

In this exchange, Sarah discusses adding a clause to the proposed mutual NDA. In the surrounding conversation, the clause concerns Sarah’s desire to have sexual contact with James and Lucas.

On January 8, 2019, Sarah was told that the mutual NDA did not prevent disclosure of illegal conduct and was encouraged to read the agreement before signing it.

Sarah writes:

“I think we should definitely think about adding that clause in there. You know...just for my peace of mind”

She then sarcastically adds:

“totally professional intentions with this contract of course”

Sarah also insists that James sign the agreement:

“but fr tho I need at least Greg to sign one bc he’s got a fat mouth”

Lucas responds:

“Yeah it was his idea to have a mutual one”

What the messages directly show

Sarah actively participated in negotiating the NDA before it was signed. She proposed adding a clause connected to the sexual activity she wanted, joked openly about the nonprofessional nature of her intentions, and demanded that James also be legally bound by the agreement.

The sexual condition originated with Sarah. James and Lucas were not using the NDA to introduce sex into the relationship and they were having their 4 other friends sign the exact same agreement as well; Sarah was attempting to connect her own desired sexual activity to the terms under which she would sign.

Why it matters

This exchange directly contradicts the later portrayal of Sarah as a passive or coerced party who was unexpectedly forced to sign an NDA designed to conceal unwanted sexual conduct.

The contemporaneous messages show Sarah negotiating from a distance before signing, proposing sexual terms for her own benefit, requesting confidentiality for her own “peace of mind,” and requiring that James sign because she feared he might disclose private information.

The record therefore shows Sarah using the NDA to facilitate and protect sexual activity she wanted, not James or Lucas using it to silence her about conduct she opposed. Later filings similarly describe Sarah as conditioning her signature on receiving what she wanted and being permitted to “do stuff” with James and Lucas.

Source

January 8, 2019 text-message exchange between Sarah and Lucas, displayed from an iPhone conversation and captured on a MacBook.

January 8, 2019: Sarah Is Told the Mutual NDA Does Not Protect Illegal Conduct

In this exchange, Sarah asks Lucas what the proposed mutual nondisclosure agreement would prevent her from discussing.

Sarah asks:

“So like what does it mean exactly?”

She then asks whether she would still be permitted to speak with her sister. Lucas explains:

“Basically we can’t talk to anyone about our interactions or any information you learned from us etc unless we are breaking the law”

Lucas also tells Sarah that she can read the agreement herself before signing it.

What the messages directly show

Sarah was informed during the NDA discussion that the agreement did not prevent disclosure of illegal conduct. Lucas expressly distinguished ordinary private information from conduct involving a violation of law.

The exchange also shows that Sarah was asking questions about the agreement, receiving explanations, and being given an opportunity to read its terms before signing.

Why it matters

This conversation directly contradicts the later portrayal of the NDA as an agreement intended to conceal crimes or prevent Sarah from reporting illegal conduct.

The contemporaneous record shows that Sarah was specifically told the opposite: the confidentiality obligations did not apply if James or Lucas were breaking the law.

Combined with Sarah’s request that James sign the agreement, her participation in discussing its terms, and the mutual nature of the NDA, this exchange shows that the agreement was being presented as protection for everyone’s private information rather than as a device for silencing reports of criminal activity.

Source

January 8, 2019 text-message exchange between Sarah and Lucas, displayed from an iPhone conversation and captured on a MacBook.

January 8, 2019: Sarah Says Cuddling With Lucas Did Not Occur Until She Was 18

On January 8, 2019, Sarah stated that cuddling with Lucas did not occur until she was 18 and mocked attempts to portray ordinary jokes and nonsexual affection as grooming.

In this exchange, Sarah and Lucas discuss online accusations involving a joke Squidward meme and claims that the two had cuddled while Sarah was underage.

Sarah first confirms that she was the person who sent the Squidward image and jokes:

“Real sexy picture of squidward there though. Might’ve turned me on 🤷‍♀️”

When Lucas mentions people discussing whether they had cuddled, Sarah states:

“Also that never happened until I was 18”

Sarah then explains that cuddling is not inherently sexual, comparing it to cuddling with her parents and siblings. She also mentions that her 17-year-old friend Madison tries to cuddle her during sleepovers and sarcastically jokes:

“Oh no I’m grooming my underage friend. Call the internet police lol”

What the messages directly show

Sarah states that cuddling between her and Lucas did not happen until after she turned 18.

She also treats the Squidward image as an obvious joke meme rather than sexual material and mocks the suggestion that ordinary cuddling between friends should automatically be characterized as grooming.

Why it matters

This exchange directly contradicts claims that physical intimacy through cuddling occurred between Sarah and Lucas while Sarah was a minor.

It also shows Sarah rejecting the broader effort to reinterpret ordinary jokes, memes, and nonsexual affection as evidence of grooming. At the time, Sarah viewed those claims as absurd and compared them to harmless affection between family members and friends.

Source

January 8, 2019 text-message exchange between Sarah and Lucas, displayed from an iPhone conversation and captured on a MacBook.

January 7, 2019: Liz Rejects the Grooming Accusation Based on What She Observed

In this Instagram message, a woman identified in the exhibit as Liz responds to accusations that Lucas groomed Sarah.

On January 7, 2019, Liz stated that the grooming accusation against Lucas was “not even close” to how she had observed him behave with Sarah.

Liz writes:

“I’m so sorry you’re being accused of grooming.”

She then states:

“That’s so gross and not even close to how you act with Sarah.”

Liz also adds:

“Kind of why I tried to warn you.”

What the messages directly show

Liz rejected the grooming accusation and stated that it did not resemble the way she had personally observed Lucas behaving with Sarah.

Her message is relevant because it comes from someone who knew Sarah in person and was present around the household during a relevant period. Rather than describing behavior she considered predatory or inappropriate, Liz said the accusation was “not even close” to Lucas’s actual conduct toward Sarah.

Why it matters

Liz’s statement provides contemporaneous third-party support for the Onision household’s account. It shows that someone familiar with the relationship did not interpret the Onision household’s behavior toward Sarah as grooming and believed the later accusation was inconsistent with what she had observed firsthand.

The message also aligns with Sarah’s own repeated statements from the same period that the Onision household was innocent and had not groomed her.

Source

Instagram direct-message exchange dated January 7, 2019, from the account “vulkenpunch,” preserved within a text-message conversation between Sarah and Lucas.