Summary, analysis, and partial archive of the Saberspark happening

Written to be palatable to and understandable for the general audience.

Admission of bias

This paste has been written by a regular of 4chan and (to a lesser extent) /mlpol/. As is known, the Brony Fandon't account has tried to start multiple "crusades" (for lack of a better term) against anyone with 4chan sympathies, most notably Mare Fair. The BF account has slandered people that the author of the paste personally knows. Some of those who have supported him in the ongoing happening have had prior conflict with this paste's author as well, most notably Amy New.
Regardless, this paste makes an attempt at presenting a neutral, unbiased view of the happening. Whether it succeeds in that is up to the reader.

Involved people

Main participants of the happening:

• Saberspark (SS) - the accused, a Youtuber with over 2 million subscribers who started out by making content for the MLP fan community (usually referred to as the Bronies; the caveats are of little relevance here).
• Brony Fandon't (BF) - an X/Twitter account shared between two people which makes exposés of varying quality about Bronies, both former and current. Depending on context, mentioning BF may mean Bonk specifically, as has been done in the admission of bias above.
• Bonk - the main maintainer of the Brony Fandon't account.
• Sophie Scruggs (Sophie) - the other person who posts as BF, though with far lesser frequency.
• thesunmous5 (thesunmouse) - the accuser.
• ILoveKimPossibleALot (KP) - a Youtuber with a pre-established grudge on Saberspark, alongside many controversies of varying nature.

Other people:

• The Slopp Block/The Opp Block - a group of streamers that discusses various happenings.
• TheMysteriousMrEnter (Enter) - many things; among them, a former Brony and the author of a well-received exposé on Star Giant Productions.
• Slug Entertainment - a streamer who interviewed KP.
• Amy New - one of the supporters of the accuser's testimonies, who claims to have been friends with them for "over 10+ years".
• Jessa (ScaredGirlTweet) - another supporter of the accuser's testimonies, who claims to have heard their story all the way back when it happened.
• banana/Major_Fury69 (MajorFury) - the compiler of a document about the happening.
• EmuEmi - the suspected true identity of the accuser, as outlined in the above mentioned document.
• Cayci - the con chair of Equestria LA.
• LazyBedHead (LBH) - an essayist involved in the happening, albeit minimally.
• Cope and Seethe (C&S) - another essayist who published a video dissecting the happening. Involed in The Opp Block.

Also of note:

• Canterlot Gardens (CG) and Equestria LA - two conventions where, according to the accuser, their recounted experiences happened.
• Brony Breakdown - a podcast run by Saberspark which had existed during the accuser's described timeframe.

Brief overview of undeniable information

All times will be in UTC unless specified otherwise. ~2014: SS and KP become friends due to shared interests.
~Late 2014: SS and KP lose touch due to the former's busyness.
—August 2nd, 2023, 13:01 (unknown time zone): SS is informed that KP is accusing one of his editors of inappropriate behaviour. On the 6th, he enquires the editor, who states that everything had been resolved privately.
~2024: KP tries to bring back the aforementioned event into the spotlight, publicly.
—January 6th, 2025, 13:00 (unknown time zone): KP privately emails SS, demanding to take action on the editor. —February 5th, 2025, 9:30 (unknown time zone): another email is sent by KP, this time accusing SS himself of inappropriate behaviour.
—February 25th, 2025, 15:30 (unknown time zone): KP sends her last email to SS.
—May 1st, 14:00: Brony Fandon't makes a post on X/Twitter accusing Saberspark of rape. At 14:02, he reposts it on Bluesky.
—On the same day, ILoveKimPossibleALot published a very poorly-received video supporting the accusations. It gets taking down fairly quickly, but not before being archived and criticised multiple times on X.
—For nearly two weeks, the reactions to the BF post start piling up, ranging from messages of support to criticism of various degrees. BF's reaction to the criticism is most aggressive, and because of this, as well as the aforementioned KP video, people start doubting the story. Various Youtube channels start covering the allegations, the most notable of these being The Opp Block. The accuser becomes open to questions and two witnesses (as per their own designation) come forth corroborating the story. A document gets published by MajorFury that claims the identity of the accuser to be EmuEmi.
—May 12th, 16:00:22: SS publishes a response video. It is generally well-received, though a few criticisms are still made.
~May 13th: Bonk tries committing suicide, gets sent to hospital; as a result, the BF account gets privated by Sophie, the other person running the account.
—May 23rd, 22:00:06: Cope and Seethe from The Opp Block publishes a video going over the allegations, looking into Bonk's history and (most importantly) conducting interviews with most of the involved parties.

The claims and interpretations of them:
—According to the accuser, she befriended Saberspark when she was 18, shortly after graduating high school. She claims that he raped (initiated sexual encounters without explicitly asking for consent) her two times in 2012, once in Canterlot Gardens, the other time in Equestria LA. Both were MLP fan conventions. In addition, SS is alleged to have acted indecently to her shortly before the encounters.
——Bonk's interpretation: these claims are true, but "vile people" have exploited the story for their personal gain (clout, money; e.g. KP) and detractors are using every bit of surrounding info ("being for the drama") to discredit them.
——KP'S interpretation: these claims are true and the best evidence for them is Saber's past behaviour with KP; however, people are trying to throw her (KP) under the bus because of one "innocent" mistake that was made.
——Interpretation of supportive bystanders: the claims are true, but the people that were to bring them to the public eye (KP, BF) have failed horribly and have put themselves more in the spotlight than the accuser; their ever continuing failure to handle the situation is making everything worse.
—According to the other side, the claims of the accuser were fabricated or at least heavily distorted, most likely for personal gain.
——Saberspark's interpretation: the claims were fabricated by KP because of an old personal grudge; the main spreaders of them are hypocritical online vigilantes (e.g. Bonk), trolls, and the haters of SS.
——Cayci's interpretation: the claims were fabricated by the accuser, who is an infamous individual with a lot of drama around her. Said individual exploited KP's grudge against Saberspark to spread these claims; KP was told many times to not go through with the whole video thing, yet did not listen, and should thus be held just as accountable as the accuser.
——Interpretation of opposing bystanders: the claims may have some truth to them, but have been overexaggerated because of an uncertain reason (most probably sensationalism). None of the main involved people have handled the situation properly, maybe except SS.

Analysis of the testimony and some of the accuser's addendums

The original public release of the testimony is split into 6 parts. This section is structured as such: there is a sub-section for each of the parts, with the unedited text at the start and commentary below it. There are also closing remarks.
(Note: it is known that there is an earlier version of the testimony with slight differences in wording. It was then edited by KP. The impact it makes to the story varies edit to edit. For the sake of simplicity, only the released statement will be considered)

Part 1: introduction

I became a fan of Saberspark when I was in high school when I found his essay video titled Ballad of the Brony back in 2011. After graduating and turning 18, I added him on Skype to tell him I was a big fan of his. He added me back almost instantly and we had a conversation editing with him giving me his phone number which was a really big deal to me at the time since this was the first time interacting with any sort of celebrity. I had developed a parasocial crush on him due to being star struck, which was something that he was aware of. We would talk on Skype and text each other semi frequently leading up to the first time meeting him.

In 2012, I went to my first pony convention. This was my first time ever traveling by myself and was soon after the two of us became friends. When I met up with him in person, he invited me to his hotel room and he showed me the video he was editing on his laptop, causing me to internally geek out. I was really nervous being alone in a hotel room with someone I was a huge fan of and had a crush on but I tried to play it cool. He was 4-5 years older than me, making me feel more nervous and out of place. He would bring up the prospects of the two of us dating and how it didn't feel right for us to do so.

Already, we start with a weak beginning. No one becomes a superfan after just one or two videos; of course, SS had many other MLP-related videos that are now deleted from his channel, but, do answer, how is an average person supposed to know this? Saber's channel has really grown since his MLP-centric uploading, and as such, most of his current fans (who are the presumed audience who are supposed to read this) probably don't even know how involved he was with the MLP fandom, if they know that he belongs/-ed to it at all.
Unsurprisingly, one ToromaruG35685 had this very question. The accuser answers it by citing SS's podcast, Brony Breakdown, although they misname it at first as "Brony Hour". This is a fairly interesting bit, as while the latter was an actual podcast, it is incredibly obscure and poorly archived. I find it quite weird that this is the podcast that BB was confused for. The accuser then also shows her (or at least there's little reason to doubt that it's hers) subscription feed from the time, with the deleted videos clearly displayed. This is a very roundabout way of doing it, as simply linking to an archive would've been enough. However, it does unintentionally add believability to the story.

The testimony alleges that SS was aware of the "crush" the accuser claims to have had. However, it is never specified whether or not SS was aware of the whole "first time interacting with a celebrity" part. Besides that, there's the question of whether SS considered himself a celebrity at all.

How specific. A latter comment by the accuser gives more precise details: September 28th, 2012, at Canterlot Gardens. Again, it is very odd to exclude this from your initial testimony: wouldn't you want as much detail as possible, to thus also increase believability? As others have noted: if they are telling the truth, the accuser has had nearly 13 years to gather evidence for their claims. Evidence which is all now conveniently absent or unable to be posted. For example: someone asks for proof of attendance, all that is given are some screenshots of emails (is it even necessary to explain how easy that is to fake?) and no con badges, because, conveniently:

@thesunmous5
May 2, 2025 · 7:43 PM UTC
About 5 years ago, I finally tossed all my con badges because I was moving and had too much stuff. [...]

Weren't you friends already? At a later point, it is stated:

@quimtana21682
May 3, 2025 · 7:14 PM UTC
[...] Before your first con did you considered saber as a friend or did he describe your relationship as a friendship?
======
@thesunmous5
May 3, 2025 · 7:25 PM UTC
[...] I thought of Saber as a friend and he would definitely have agreed. We interacted both through messages and publicly so his friends knew of me.

Is this not contradictory?

This video isn't ever specified, but at least you can give the benefit of the doubt here that they simply wouldn't remember such a minute detail. But, then again, it left enough of an impression to be mentioned, so...

His birthday is public information, very easy to find - October 11, 1988. Doing the math, he'd be 23 years, 11 months, and 17 days old. In other words, it's more of a 5-6 year difference than a 4-5 one. Assuming the accuser is EmuEmi, who's birthday is on Dec 17 (1993), it'd be a difference of about 5 years and 2 months.

Part 2: the first IRL encounter

After that, he almost immediately initiated making out with me and guided me to his bed. In this moment, he did not directly ask me for consent. I was thrown onto his bed and he would insert himself into me. Saberspark was also significantly larger than me as I was an 80 something pound 18 year old girl so I physically could not stop him.

I felt extremely nervous and uncomfortable because I had never experienced having any sort of sexual intimacy with someone I was not dating before, much less someone I just met. I was very new to meeting people online in general.

At that moment, I laid there, dissociating, as it felt very wrong while trying to rationalize it in my head to convince myself it was a safe and normal encounter. He rushed off to clean and finish himself and came back to the bed and offered me a handshake saying "Friends?" This would cause me for the rest of the event to feel that I was taken advantage of and ashamed of myself for not trying to stop the interaction. Though, I tried pretending I was fine to everyone around me. I was and still am demi sexual and being put in that position was not something I wanted.

This is hard to comment on, as it doesn't have any evidence: it is merely a recounting of events. If it did not happen (which is Saber's stance), then there is nothing he can say in response. Of course, if something did happen, then it is more advantageous for him to deny it. However, emphasis should be placed on if, and the burden of proof lies on the accuser. Do also take note of the line >I tried pretending I was fine to everyone around me; if someone questions why there are no witnesses from that time, the accuser has just given themselves a convenient justification.

Part 3: start of the second encounter

I maintained the friendship until a second occurrence happening at a completely different pony con in 2013. This time, we met in a public space but had no one around and talked for a while. He kept bringing up the prospects of us starting a relationship but how it felt wrong. He would grab my hand saying how it felt so right, only to push my hand away saying "but so wrong". I had decided that my crush on him was something I needed to get over because I felt that my emotions were being toyed with.

He then suggested going to a more public space around others and we went into an elevator to go to the lobby of the pony con hotel. As soon as the door closed, Saberspark forcefully shoved me against the wall and shoved his tongue down my throat. It scared me and actually hurt, triggering another attack of dissociation. Once again, he did not ask for consent when throwing me into this situation.

Once again with the lack of concreteness at the start. The accuser later clarifies the date as November 2nd, 2012, in Equestria LA. Yes, you read that right, the year was initially mistaken. Reminder: 13 years to gather the evidence. Oh, and the con took place starting Nov 3rd, but the accuser "clarified" that it actually happened "the night before the first day of the convention". You'd think you'd want to emphasise the times as much as possible here, no?
Note: the con chair of Equestria LA (Cayci) wrote an open letter to KP, where she calls the accuser a "bitch", among other things. Here's a hypothesis, albeit not a very well-supported one I came up with: perhaps directly naming the cons was done to avoid her speaking out? Just a thought, may very well be false.

Minor point: weird how this "public space" isn't specified (unlike the lift or the lobby after it).

I'd say the same thing about "conveniently no witnesses", but what is stated is even more suspect. See part 4.

As with the previous section, the described events have no proof behind them; if Saber did nothing of the described, he has no way to respond aside from denying it; if he did do something, it is more advantageous for him to deny it. Even if he'd admit that at least a part of the testimony in this part is correct, everything would just turn into a he said, she said situation, and because of the burden of proof being on the accuser, SS would have the upper hand.

Part 4: escalation of the second encounter

Once the doors opened and people were present (this led me to feel very embarrassed), he got off me and took my hand and guided me towards the stairs to go back down to where we just were and into a men's restroom where he pulled his pants down and guided my hands and head to perform oral sex on him. I was afraid of denying him because of past experiences with sexual assault so I did it to get it over with without wanting to cause a problem, where he would ejaculate on my face, apologize profusely, and then offered the same handshake as he did at the con I initially met him saying "friends?"

Despite pretending I was fine, I had slowly begun pulling away from Saberspark. I cried that night while staying with a friend but waited for that friend to fall asleep so no one could hear me and I would cry for months feeling ashamed of myself for putting myself in a compromising situation with someone I hardly knew.

People were present... weird how there are no witnesses who'd confirm that, no records of people talking about it, nothing. Nothing at all. You'd think at least one witness would've posted about it back when it happened; you'd think that at least one witness would come out and say "yes! I did indeed loosely remember seeing something like that when I was at that one hotel that one time", but no, nothing like that. But, let's play Devil's advocate: maybe there weren't that many people? Maybe none of them were Bronies and thus they knew nothing of what they just saw? Without further corroboration, nothing can be stated with certainty, only guesses can be made.

As has been said earlier, the accuser conveniently has no witnesses. The second part reads more like "if the person I roomed with comes out saying 'I don't remember anything like this', I can point to this section to counter them" than anything else. It also present a bit of a problem with timing: if the rape happened at night (as was later clarified), then the timeframe between the alleged rape, the friend falling asleep, and the accuser crying should be minimal, perhaps too minimal. As no further comment was given by the accuser, only speculation can be done from here.

To not repeat myself, it's the exact same "no proof, no way to disprove" situation as in other sections.

Part 5: a retrospective

I had always felt taken advantage of by him and tried being friendly and pretending nothing was wrong because it was all I knew how to do. I would blame myself for the interactions for years, only opening up a few close people, questioning if consent was implied because of my crush and unwillingness and fear to outright try to stop the advances because of how uncomfortable I felt. I understand that there is a possibility that he felt consent was implied because he knew I had a crush on him, however, he not once asked me for consent directly and was instead thrown into these sexual encounters, usually very suddenly.  

There were no discussions about the power dynamic between us as a popular content creator and a fan at any time, and my parasocial connection to him and not wanting someone I was a fan of to hate me if I rejected him, leaving me afraid to stop his advances.  

Notice how it's not said to who she was friendly and pretending. If the who is the people around the accuser, then that all ties back to the "no witnesses" point. The who can also be SS himself: too many possibilities for interpretation to list them all.

The problem is evident: what you know have are actual witnesses (hooray?), but none of them have witnessed the event directly; they have merely heard the story from the accuser. The wording of "close people" also does a little favour - if the accuser were to be definitively identified, and their friends would come out saying "We never heard this story", it creates the opportunity to respond with "well, you just aren't close enough with her".

If we were to assume that the accuser is EmuEmi, it raises the question of whether Saber thought of it that way - sure, perhaps that Pegasister podcast was comparatively less successful, but, in the grand scheme of things, it was near the top of its niche. Could he have perhaps regarded himself and the accuser as equals, then? (Assuming the accuser isn't lying, of course)

Part 6: End of testimony

Over time, I grew increasingly distant and would eventually end contact completely. I don't feel safe enough to fully come forward because I don't want his fans and friends or even him to harass or contact me publicly. I wish to stay anonymous so I can avoid the anxiety and stress of being targeted by either him himself, his friends, and especially his fans, as Saberspark has over 2 million subscribers and even sharing my story at all has me feeling really afraid. I have seen other instances of Saberspark using his enormous platform to confront people online he has had conflict with and heard. I have also witnessed several instances of his friends attempting to justify him and his other actions. I was not made aware of his jokes about consent and his recent behavior involving Chris until only recently and it left my stomach in knots. I please ask above all else for my privacy to be respected. I don't wish to publicly defend my personal experience and just wished to share my experience.

End of Testimony.

I may as well mention it now: there's a 99.999% probability that SS knows who this is, if it is real. As such, this entire "not publishing info to protect my privacy" bit is inherently absurd - Saber can leak it at any time, a fair amount of his friends can make educated guesses on who it is... even the public can figure it out. The current running theory is that it is EmuEmi, and there's a fair amount of evidence for it.

I sure do love when no examples are given.

See the section on SS's response. I personally think he overemphasised this whole debacle (instead of showing how the testimony inherently can't be disproved without it turning into "he said, she said", unless the accuser makes a big mistake like citing a time when SS was provably doing something else).

Paraphrasing: I am making a claim but I do not wish to proof or defend it.

Conclusion

The "heart" of the testimony - the rape allegations - are presented with no proof whatsoever, as any and all evidence is either absent (the "witnesses", the con badges, the Skype conversations), highly circumstantial, or concealed because of "seeking to be anonymous", even when considering that Saber most probably knows who this is. Any proper response to it from Saber would devolve into he said, she said, and as the burden of proof lies on the accuser, Saber would inherently have the upper hand. Parts of the testimony are contradicted or changed by the accuser themselves - the date of the second incident, the "were they friends beforehand?" question... Even if the testimony is true, it would still be poorly written (e.g. assumes the readers know of SS's fame in the MLP community). Worst of all, the accuser themselves admit that they are unwilling to defend their position.

Does all of that mean that the testimony is false? No. Perhaps the testimony's biggest "strength" is that you can't discuss it without the discussion turning into speculation. You can even see it in this very analysis itself with the point about Cayci. With that said, the testimony has major (mostly unaddressed) flaws, and the only thing worse than it is the response (mainly from Bonk's side), which shall be covered in the next section.

On the response

Unsurprisingly, publishing rape allegations with a questionable amount of research behind them caused quite a stir. This section will discuss Bonk's/BF's response to criticism, Saberspark's response, Cope and Seethe's video, and maybe some other things in the future..

On Bonk's response

Here's how this'll go: there'll be a section for each of his arguments, with an example of them in action [Note: right now, the BF account is privated, but I'll get the quotes when it becomes working again. Worst case scenario, I'll get them from screencaps]. Then, there'll be an explanation on why the argument is flawed.

The Document argument

Example:

@BronyFandont
May 2, 2025 · 10:16 AM UTC
A lot of people are demanding the victim do more to make their case.

At the same time, I have pinned to my account a document over 300 pages long, full of straight information on what Black Gryph0n has done. And it has gotten half the reach that this Saber story has in 24 hours.
May 2, 2025 · 10:16 AM UTC
I'm glad that this victim is being heard.

But I hate knowing people don't want anything but drama.

It doesn't matter if it's just a retelling of what happened, or 300+ pages of proof. People will argue it. Boost posts that say less. And pretend to be wise.

Counterarguments:
For one, even if the document regarding BG were to be without any flaws, it is by no means a justification to then stop putting effort into researching, vetting and whatnot cases like this. If anything, it makes BF look worse: he does one thing right, then justifies failing to do an analogous thing by noting how well he did that first thing. A disappointment, one could say.

Second, the former counterargument makes an assumption on the document that is verifiably false. Long does not equate to good. The Saberspark situation has caused the document to be reevaluated by observers. One notable example of this is The Opp Block's stream going over it. Going in-depth would be tangential to say the least, so let's just leave it at that.

Third, shouldn't BF be happy about all the public attention? The more people know, the better? There's a multitude of reasons why the BG and SS exposés received different amounts of attention. For example: BG had accusations beforehand levied by 4chan (this is something that BF really wants to gloss over, but to put it bluntly: you don't win the 2015 /mlp/ nominations for worst fan for nothing, see here), Saber had none. Another reason is that, while BG has more subscribers than SS, he has a different demographic and niche, which does make an impact.

Fourth, while the SS accusations have received more attention than the BG ones, the BG accusations have had a larger real life impact, getting him banned from cons, canceling multiple of his performances and collaborations, so on, so forth.

The BlackGryph0n argument

Example:

@BronyFandont
May 8, 2025 · 12:46 AM UTC
I can't speak on everything right now. It's not my place to.

But Cayci was even at Gryph0n's wedding. You're right; the people she surrounds herself with are extremely suspect for her.
@BViddyCent
May 8, 2025 · 3:14 AM UTC
I always knew fact-checking wasn't your strong suit, but Cayci and I weren't at Gabe and Claire's wedding.
@BronyFandont
May 8, 2025 · 12:15 PM UTC
This isn't going the way you hoped, is it?

I know you're the reason Cayci is lying. The more you two try to twist the narrative, the more we're forced to talk about you. 

Gryph0n isn't the only freak Cayci associates with. Neither is Saber.

Counterarguments:
For one, as was noted in the above section, there is now some suspicion on the validity of the groomer allegations on BG. Second, even if we were to assume that the claims about BF are true, defending a groomer by arguing that he hasn't groomed anyone does not make the defender a groomer. At the very worst, it is circumstantial. Third, if anything, it gives a sort of bias to BF - he is very much against BG, so he's naturally inclined to have a negative opinion towards anyone defending him. A negative opinion that can cloud his judgement, or in other words - a bias.

The Drama argument

Example:

@BronyFandont
May 2, 2025 · 10:16 AM UTC
If you are only talking about a video that had barely even been online, over rape allegations, you only care about drama.

It is that simple.

The only thing worse than how the video was handled, are those that only care about yelling about it.

Counterarguments:
First, calling any type of conflict drama is not exclusive to the MLP community. Second, what is exactly wrong with pointing out the failures of properly getting this story out to the public, or with pointing out perceived hypocrisy or undeniable bias?

The KP argument

Example:

@BronyFandont
May 2, 2025 · 9:50 AM UTC
Honestly, I think you hyperfocusing on KP's video instead of the actual victim, with an audience as large as yours, is just as bad as the video. But at least the video was removed. You, however, still only talk about it.
@AGramuglia
May 2, 2025 · 10:19 AM UTC
I have made 27 public posts about the survivor
@BronyFandont
May 2, 2025 · 10:25 AM UTC
And many more about nothing. 

The KP video discussion is exclusively drama. The video was barely seen. It was removed almost instantly. KP herself did so. The proposed "harm" it did only exists through the narrative that it did harm, perpetuated by posts like yours.

Counterargument:
It's true that BF can't be blamed for the quality of KP's video. However, he can be blamed for shilling the video without having watched it prior. Or perhaps he just threw KP under the bus? Who knows. At points, it feels like BF brings that video up more than the actual detractors.

The Saviour argument

@BronyFandont
May 6, 2025 · 6:49 PM UTC
Do you think I want to be here?? If I could, I'd walk away and save myself this overwhelming stress. 

But I CAN'T. People trusted me to help them. And I'm not done doing what I promised. 

Keep kicking me. I'm not leaving until the job is done.

Counterargument:
Not all help is beneficial. Some is beneficial to a point. A point that Bonk has very clearly crossed. His tendency to constantly get into fights with just about anyone who disagrees with him (and resorting to dubious tactics in said fights) has caused more attention to be given to him than the alleged victim. As he pretty much never gains the upper hand in the discussions (as shown by the amount of likes his posts and the posts of his opponents receive), all it does is further harm the case of the accuser. It is like a saviour complex of sorts. By all means, the best thing he could do is hand the conversation over to someone more competent.

The Law Enforcement argument

Example:

@bronyfandont.bsky.social
May 23, 2025 at 10:26 PM (UTC)
During my time in the hospital, I made new friends.

One of them a woman who was raped by a man in the military. 

She is currently going through the police to try and get him to face consequences. But the police doubt her. Interrogate her. Make her worried about what will happen.
@bronyfandont.bsky.social
May 23, 2025 at 10:26 PM (UTC)
It led to her being where I was. On hold for our safety from ourselves. And she's not better now that she's out. She still has to keep going through it.

I didn't need to know her story to know police isn't always, or even usually, a solution. 

Too many of you, I wish heard it from her directly.

Counterargument:
In America (where all of this is taking place), there are various organisations that help rape victims bring their cases to the police, such as RAINN. The situation with the woman is different in a few key aspects, mainly that the alleged rapist is in the military, something which makes persecuting him harder, especially if he's high-ranking. Besides, it is the police's job to investigate the situation as in-depth as they can. They won't just take anyone's word blindly. And on online vigilantism: what gives BF the right to be the judge, jury, and executioner?

The RAINN fuck-up

@AGramuglia
May 6, 2025 · 5:59 PM UTC
You 
Should 
Have 
Contacted 
RAINN
@BronyFandont
May 6, 2025 · 6:08 PM UTC
Dumbass, I don't even know who that IS. Why would I have reached out to someone I didn't know existed??? This is a completely POINTLESS response you're so angrily shouting. Even if I did know who they were, "you should have" is ALSO pointless right now. I cannot change the past.
@AGramuglia
May 6, 2025 · 6:26 PM UTC
If you don't know about the Rape, Abuse, and Incest National Network, you should reconsider your position in being someone people can trust to come to about this topic
@BronyFandont
May 6, 2025 · 6:29 PM UTC
They came to me.

Many have at this point.

Maybe instead of fighting me about who they chose, you should try to understand why they did.
@AGramuglia
May 6, 2025 · 6:33 PM UTC
I am not fighting you.

I am pissed off by your irresponsibility, but I am trying to provide you valuable information that you can use to avoid making this mistake again
@BronyFandont
May 6, 2025 · 6:38 PM UTC
I will not tell someone that they need to go through the legal system, no matter how much you insist it's the only moral path.

I know better than that. If you don't agree, fine. But demanding that I agree with you isn't just ignorant, but damaging. We don't live in justice.

Counterargument:
Let's imagine ourselves in Bonk's spot. Someone tells you: "You should've contacted RAINN". You don't know what or who that is. So, you look it up, make some well thought-out argument, maybe point to some case where contacting RAINN did nothing.
...But no, BF didn't even bother searching up what RAINN is. His "refined argument" suffers from the fact that RAINN is, in fact, different. Their entire purpose is to help your story get heard out by the police.

The Ad hominem fallacy

Examples too many to single out.
Counterargument:
When BronyFandon't (or anyone, for that matter) engages a post critical of them, they fail to understand that said posts consists of two parts: the statement/argument and the bias/surrounding factors. Often times, BF only responds to the latter, while ignoring the far more crucial former. Just because a person does not seem "good" to one (often because of subjective factors) or seems biased does not mean that they do not make a fair point. Do note that Saber is guilty of the same in his response.

The Suicide tactic

The thread has been deleted, but it is well documented.
Counterargument:
Suicide is an interesting thing within discourse. It is something that is inherently taboo, something that people are uncomfortable talking or thinking about. When Bonk threatens suicide, it causes prior discussion to cease. After all, if he goes through with it, wouldn't those against him be blamed? And no one wants to be responsible for the death of his. It's hard to argue about suicide without seeming, for lack of a better description, apathetical to the lives of others. But, even here, there are things to consider: for one, this wouldn't be the first time Bonk has threatened suicide when he gets put in a tough spot. There's significant precedent to assume he won't go through with it. Second, suicide threats have a temporary impact: the moment he seems to get better, people will start arguing all over again. Even if he were to die, it would just delay the inevitable discussion. All that would be different is the narrative: it'd no longer be "hypocritical narcissist baselessly accuses popular Youtuber of rape", but rather "unfortunate mentally ill person was convinced of the guilt of a popular Youtuber and committed suicide when people doubted him".

Conclusion

Though this wasn't particularly emphasised, the BronyFandon't account, and specifically Bonk, often resorts into name-calling, deflection, and whatnot when put in a disadvantageous position. Most of his arguments are closer to projecting his worldview upon others than actual, valid points. The few points he actually has are riddled with various fallacies. He displays what can be described only as a saviour complex, featuring irrational paranoia to outside help and a complete denial of having a bias. When everything fails, he resorts to threatening suicide, something which by its nature causes further discussion to cease.

On Saberspark's response

Unlike the previous section, this will be short, as Saberspark doesn't make that many points. It is hard to comment on something when there's nothing to comment on, no overly obvious mistakes, only general tendencies of a questionable defense strategy. The best thing to do is to go straight to the conclusion:
Saberspark's video does not put any time or effort into showcasing the flaws of the accuser's testimony. Rather, it attempts to establish that the people who were tasked with spreading the info (KP and BF) are unreliable, using every single bit of surrounding context to showcase their bias. It puts too much time into establishing SS as someone who "cares about victims" and showing his material loses, which, if anything, merely strengthens the position of those against him. Had he showed the testimony's failings (and kept the rest of his points as further proof), he would've (at least in my opinion) achieved a far more resounding success.

Briefly on Amy New

One of the two "witnesses" to the testimony. It is known that she is the one who passed the accuser's story to BF and claims to have known the accuser for over 10 years, yet she also claims (or at least implies) to be an unbiased source and even maintains a friendship (or at least some contact that's unrelated to the happening) with Sophie Scruggs, one of the people behind the BF account. Take this quote below, where Amy speaks of facts she'd only know of she had contact with Sophie.

@AmyNewBlue
May 15, 2025 · 2:53 AM UTC
I don’t know who needs to hear this but @SophieAScruggs was not in charge of the @BronyFandont account, she only stepped into help for a short time because of DestinyDoodles she very much wasn’t involved with the Saberspark stuff on that account.
@AmyNewBlue
May 15, 2025 · 2:53 AM UTC
The situation was all very triggering for her that she didn’t want to be apart of it now she’s being blamed for it.
@SophieAScruggs
May 15, 2025 · 2:56 AM UTC
Thank you for saying this

This is also shown by her having access to information not available to the general public. For example, she claims that someone from BF has contacted RAINN and received little-to-no help. This is the first time such info got published. When she gets questioned on it, she dodges clarifying and moves the topic away to RAINN getting less funds. It's so jarring that I'm surprised the person who she was talking with didn't notice it.

@TheWing87889447
May 13, 2025 · 9:06 PM UTC
Honestly, that's what should have been done from the start. [referring to contacting RAINN]
@AmyNewBlue
May 13, 2025 · 11:21 PM UTC
The did contact them, they were just told “I’m sorry, you didn’t deserve it” and that really was it.
@AGramuglia
May 14, 2025 · 3:34 AM UTC
.....are you sure they really contacted them? That sounds extremely atypical....
@AmyNewBlue
May 16, 2025 · 4:39 PM UTC
I know this isn’t related to the victim but Rainn has been cutting services. Just thought it might be worth mentioning.
https://www.nytimes.com/2025/05/15/well/rainn-dei-trump-executive-orders.html

She also advocates for nuking the BF account. Yeah, sure, first, the access to the tweets that BF has made has been restricted, and now she's advocated to remove them entirely, with no proper archive in sight. Perhaps that not what she meant to say, but that would be the end result.

@QuentinOwens11
May 15, 2025 · 3:07 AM UTC
@AmyNewBlue Amy tbh I’m more worried about Bonk if he gets out early he’s might using his BluSky to start ranting again and do much worse
@AmyNewBlue
May 15, 2025 · 4:44 AM UTC
If you could maybe try reporting the account, Sophie tried to nuke the Twitter account but she was locked out. Both the Twitter and BS I think should be removed.

Briefly on KP

As everyone knows by now, the video she had made about SS was so shit it only stayed for a couple of hours before being deleted. Her importance in the happening has, at least in my opinion, been vastly overestimated (arguably maliciously). She is the primary scapegoat for Bonk and the main subject of Saber's response video (when that really should've been, say, the accuser). That is not to say that she doesn't have any relevance beyond that video (e.g. the leaked voice message threatening the accuser with doxxing), but to emphasise, it is not as large as some claim it to be.

Bonk does a fairly interesting thing here - he too says that people should stop talking so much about KP, but then he proceeds to write mountains upon mountains of text about how all the fuckups should be blamed on KP and he had nothing to do with it.

On the accuser's identity

As per the document by MajorFury, the accuser is most likely a certain woman going by EmuEmi on the internet. While his arguments are mostly circumstantial (e.g. she was more or less the same age as the accuser in the testimony's described timeframe, she is confirmed to have visited the cons), they do add up. Probably the strongest public evidence is that, when EmuEmi was asked about whether she is the accuser, the account of the accuser (thesunmous5) "mysteriously" got privated.

Although KP's leak and Cope and Seethe's video both claim with certainty that it is EmuEmi, citing a video that accidently had her name included in the Dropbox link it was sent by, this paste still operates under the assumption that the accuser is unknown and likely (but not 100%) EmuEmi. My reasoning is as follows: for one, EmuEmi (as far as I know) has not confirmed being the accuser. I don't really want to decisively implicate her, even if that's where all the evidence points. Second, for most of the arguments made in the paste, her identity is not important. And finally, the third (And perhaps the biggest) reason - I began writing the paste when her identity was not clear, and I don't really want to have to rewrite it all.

On Cope and Seethe's video

One of the first to cover the Saberspark happening were the steamer collective The Opp Block, one of whose members is a person going by Cope and Seethe. He has published a video titled "The Shaming of Saberspark" where he goes over it. However, as it is published by an outsider to the MLP community, it has a fair amount of flaws. They shall be addressed in this section.

This is the first sentence of the video. The intention behind it is clear: simultaneously establish a sort of "knowledgeableness" of the situation that others lack, whilst also distancing himself from the MLP community as far as possible, presenting himself as just an observer. The former is outright false: as will be shown, C&S has a surface level understanding of the community at best. If one showed TurkeyTom's essay on Bronies to someone with no prior knowledge of the fandom, they would come out with about the same amount of knowledge as he does. The former is debatable in the sense that he may not even be an observer, rather just someone who claims to know a lot about the fandom.

This particular happening discusses Saberspark and ILoveKimPossibleALot. The former has, as far as I'm aware, only used it ironically, writing on Twitter in 2014: <"Any person who must say 'I am Horse Famous' is not truly Horse Famous." - Tywin Lannister. The latter has openly objected so such a label, saying <Sometimes just being famous... fame isn't even the right word; making videos on Youtube, but people sometimes get those things confused.

My guess for why is was included in the video is to further establish that whole "knowledgeableness" aspect. He calls it an "obsession", even though I'd say it's a fair bet that he hasn't even seen a video made by TK. Calling it a "drama" isn't exactly the best call either; one of BF's main arguments is how situations like these get labeled as "dramas" too often, and now you're just giving him further proof.

Do not ask what "this" is referring to, or what DAGames has anything to do with this (his relation to the MLP community is so minimal it may as well not be there). For the "firmly attributed", you can argue that about popularity, but you'll need sources for the origin claim.

And so, the illusion of "knowledgeableness" falls. Yes, it is true that drama and conflict have been a significant part of the community since the start. But "allegations" are just a small subset of the types of conflict, one which ultimately hasn't really had that noteworthy of an impact at any point. The issue here is clear: outsiders have heard plenty about the allegations of certain Bronies (the aforementioned TK, Mandopony, etc.), but information about the other types of conflict (the whole deal with Purple Tinker, the collapse of Derpibooru in 2020, the temporary banning of Anonfilly on /mlp/, the whole Equestrian nonsense on Tumblr in 2014...) or even about the positive things (the charities, the positive experience people have had with the community, so on) has never reached them.

Here, the issue is very simple - contrary to popular believe among the outsiders, there just weren't that many cases relating to abuse (sexual or otherwise), or at least not many that were heavily publicised. He cites the example of TK, but actions speak louder than words, and guess what? TK has been ousted from the fandom and the internet as a whole. A simple look at the comments under the DRWolf101 video that was shown shows the general attitudes were to, in fact, not forgive him. So, where did C&S get such an idea from? He's really just regurgitating what others have said.

@AmyNewBlue
May 8, 2025 · 4:16 PM UTC
The Brony fandom has always written off sexual abuse as “drama” and called victims liars.
May 8, 2025 · 4:30 PM UTC
Any feelings that make them feel “uncomfy” they will just write it off as drama because they don’t want to feel bad. Anything that would make them self reflect is “drama”

As is later shown, C&S is aware of Amy New's existence and considers her fairly relevant to the happening. It wouldn't be a stretch to assume that he has read the above cited post. BF has publicly shared similar sentiments as well.

As mentioned the above section, the whole point about "forgiveness" is nonsense. Likewise, you'd be hard pressed to find anyone in the MLP community who knows who Lio Convoy is. If he really made (supposedly) that big of an impact, why can't you find him mentioned even once on 4chan, the capital and biggest city of MLP drama?. He's also got a fair share of controversies himself (from what I've seen), but that is besides the point.

[Citation needed]

It is good. No complaints here. Something to note: although C&S knows shit about the community (as has been and will continue to be demonstrated), the portions where he actually interviews people aren't that bad. He seems to have done his research about Emi (or at least that's how it looks from a surface glance). If there's anything this video is worth watching for, it is sections like these.

Context: he is referring to Lance Jerkov, a very small Sonic-themed channel that made a video about EmuEmi. The problem is self-evident; C&S speaks of "this community" without stopping to think "what community am I talking about again?". I don't think it is necessary to explain why or how Sonic fans and MLP fans are different. Jerkov is clearly a Sonic channel, but C&S has only established the (false) forgiveness thing in regard to the MLP community. You can't even claim that he's talking about the "animation analysis community", because Sonic is, well, a game franchise. And the term "analysis community" is without a doubt too broad for this "forgiveness" thing to be even be plausibly true.

Edits have to be judged separately. There is nothing wrong with asking the accuser to add a concrete date to when the incident allegedly occurred. With the more... questionable additions, the first question to be asked is "did the accuser agree to such a change?" If no, then by all means, blame KP all you want. If yes, then another question is to be asked: "Did KP have to persuade the accuser into making such a change?"
To not mention helping in editing the testimony, however, is a valid criticism.

Back with the false narrative. Come to think of it, there is indeed one "community" that can said to act as described: they are usually called the "drama commentary community". Wait, couldn't C&S be described as part of this community? ...Ooooops.

It is not bad. The fact that he has access to all the DMs is another plus for the video: it helps him to disprove claims by BF that would otherwise remain uchallanged.

It starts out good. Then, he starts talking about foalcon (and related). And so, it goes down hill.
For one, there is absolutely no transition between talking about LBH and BF's opinions on foalcon. It just gets abruptly mentioned.
Next, he goes back to the "this community" babble, ignoring that Bonk is discussing Deltarune, not MLP (speaking of, I'd advice making it clear that it is specifically Bonk writing all of the presented text).
Third, since we're on the topic of Deltarune, here's a very minor point - Noelle's age is never specified in-game.
Last but not least, consider what C&S's argument really is: <He likes loli/foalcon/cub, so why should he be the one talking about sexual allegations? Why hasn't anyone vetted him? There are a number of issues here. The main one is it ignores the claims he's making and instead focuses on his character and other surrounding details. Of course, Bonk has done that himself too, so has Saberspark. Just because he's into some controversial things doesn't mean he suddenly has no point or authority. Not to say that he has any; just that he lacks them for different reasons.
Certainly, there are better arguments to make against Bonk in this case, no?
Sidenote: the wording of "pornography depicting underaged furry characters" has two flaws: one is obvious, and it is that what is being described is usually referred to as "fictional pornography", the distinction is important, not just legally. The second is that using "furry" fails to capture the nuance of this type of content - in particular, there are three relevant types, those being loli/shota (depicting humans), foalcon (depicting MLP pony characters), and cub (what Noelle could be classified as, though from what I've seen, she usually isn't).
C&S argues that the Noelle thing is relevant because the only fuel for BF's allegations is his credibility. I'd argue as follows: the thing that needs to be examined before all else are the claims themselves. This has been done in this paste, coming to the conclusion that there is no evidence, and because of the burden of proof, Saber has the upper hand. Only then can one start mentioning all the surrounding bits of information that simply further discredit BF.

Did I mention how he had multiple points against LBH? He, uh... also says she took BF's words for granted and... huh, that's more or less it.

Fine section. Could have more research done behind it, but fine.

Again, as noted before, the interview portions of the video are probably the best thing about it.

It's just an abridged reading of one of his threads with commentary added. Props for not coming to conclusion that he had any influence, I suppose.

It's a surface level part. For example, one of the things talked about is how his "other major controversy". Anyone who has even a little knowledge about him would assume that this is talking about the aforementioned collapse of Derpibooru in 2020. But no, he's actually discussing Potluck, a person who Woot used to date that decided to post his pedophilic flag design on Twitter and got promptly banned. Of course, C&S would never mention the fact that Potluck was a notable moderator for an image site (booru) that was and still is heavily against foalcon and loli (source, verification, also this)- oh no, that'd contradict his earlier established narrative...
For something unrelated, he says that Woot has retweeted "pornographic images of Sweetie Belle". He only gave one, censored example; it is this image by Andelai2. Is it suggestive? Yes. Is it fetishistic? Arguably so. But is it outright explicit, as C&S implies? No. Don't go thinking that there are some alternative explicit versions, there aren't. Not only that, but the tags also specify that it is an older Sweetie Belle... Not like it matter for C&S, though.

It's fine. Good, even! But nothing particularly important to point out.

Conclusion

C&S's video features is very clearly made by a complete outsider to the MLP community, who tries to present himself as at least somewhat knowledgeable on the topic, when he really isn't. He constantly speaks about "This community" when in fact referring to multiple communities, overexaggerates the prevalence of sexual allegations in the fandom, doesn't do any deeper research on the involved aside from maybe EmuEmi and Bonk, so on, so forth. However, the video does have one saving grace, that of course being the interviews. If there's anything the video is worth watching for, it is the interviews done with KP, Cayci, BlackGryph0n's wife... Knowing who refused to do interviews tells a lot as well.

Overall conclusion

The claims that Saberspark is a rapist were published by an anonymous source with no concrete proof. The main spreader of them, Bonk/BronyFandont, has further discredited them with his own failures to defend against his detractors' arguments, resorting to name-calling and an uncountable amount of fallacies. His commitment to "helping" the alleged victim, even when everyone around him can clearly see he's not fit for it, can only be described as a saviour complex. With that said, Saberspark's response to the allegations was less of an actual response and more of an attempt to discredit those spreading them. At least one of the semi-witnesses to the accuser's testimony, Amy New, shows a strong connection to BronyFandont and should thus be considered biased. Additionally, the poorly received video by KP about the drama has turned into a central point of discussion, becoming both Bonk's No. 1 scapegoat and essentially the main part of Saber's video, when it really is quite irrelevant.

Besides that, a notable video has been made on the happening by Cope and Seethe. While it shows valuable investigation and original research in the form of interviews with a fair amount of involved parties, its other parts discussing the MLP fandom and other things that are not very directly related to happening are far weaker. MajorFury has done great work in the spheres of archival and pinpointing the accuser's identity, but his conclusions and interactions online leave much to be desired.

Other

The posts that started it all:

@BronyFandont
May 1, 2025 · 2:00 PM UTC
Trigger Warning: Mentions Rape

The following is a testimony of rape by coerced consent between @Saberspark and the victim in said testimony. There were 2 isolated incidents, in 2012 and in 2013.

This will all be in a video exposé by ILoveKimPossibleALot, releasing today.
[First four parts of the accuser testimony attached as images]
======
@BronyFandont
May 1, 2025 · 2:00 PM UTC
This person wishes to remain anonymous, though can be reached for question at @thesunmous5.

This story, as well as more, will be included in the previously mentioned video exposé by @ILoveKPAlot, releasing later today.
[The other two parts of the testimony]

Excerpts of the victim's responses:

@SPARKRlZZLE
May 1, 2025 · 4:27 PM UTC
. @thesunmous5 Hi! If you’re able to answer this question, do you have some sort of proof that you met Saber in the form of text logs or something of the like, without it showing who you are?
======
@thesunmous5
May 2, 2025 · 9:49 AM UTC
Hello. I’m sorry for not responding sooner. Skype unfortunately wiped every chat log. I do have proof of us both attending these two events and our association, however, it would show who I am.
////////////
@CtSpaceboy
May 1, 2025 · 5:46 PM UTC
@thesunmous5 Hey.  So, I wanna say I’m sorry to hear what Saberspark did to you.

Question:
How old were you back in 2012 when this all happened?
======
@thesunmous5
May 2, 2025 · 9:50 AM UTC
Thank you for your kind comment. To answer, I was 18 years old, few months out of high school.
======
@CtSpaceboy
May 2, 2025 · 3:04 PM UTC
@thesunmous5 You’re welcome.

And okay, yeah.  Makes sense.

Do you by any chance have any photos or videos of the incident?

That way they can be good evidence so that way I can call the authorities on SaberSpark.
======
@thesunmous5
May 2, 2025 · 7:20 PM UTC
Both times happened so suddenly. I honestly wasn’t thinking to get my phone to document it. I was focused on trying to get through the interaction and leave.
////////////
@SPARKRlZZLE
May 2, 2025 · 7:29 PM UTC
Is there any form of evidence like a con badge you have? Can censor out the details
======
@thesunmous5
May 2, 2025 · 7:43 PM UTC
About 5 years ago, I finally tossed all my con badges because I was moving and had too much stuff. I did find some emails appear where I was inquiring about talking to a guest there.
[Attached image: https://mlpol.net/images/src/37AABA17D7DA6340A31A350951A2739C-78787.jpg ]
======
@thesunmous5
May 2, 2025 · 7:46 PM UTC
This is where the first incident happened. Iirc, someone has pointed out that he confirmed his attendance to this event in his recent video.
////////////
@SPARKRlZZLE
May 2, 2025 · 8:00 PM UTC
Is there anything else that you have that can be some sort of evidence without showing your identity? Maybe something similar to what you just provided
======
@thesunmous5
May 2, 2025 · 8:14 PM UTC
I will say I did accidentally misspeak on a detail. The second incident was actually in 2012 as well, not 2013. I misremembered it being early 2013 instead of the end of the year of 2012. 

6:00 I can at least show proof he was there. 

youtu.be/e4k7fEBDJow
////////////
@quimtana21682
May 3, 2025 · 6:01 PM UTC
Hi @thesunmous5. I Know from Amy you've been feeling sick, and I known it's stressing but hope you feel better.

I had two questions, do you have the Skype messages from that time?
======
@thesunmous5
May 3, 2025 · 7:08 PM UTC
Thank you for this. I checked my Skype and it seems the messages from everyone in my contacts are wiped. I asked friends and they logged in and had a similar experience. It must be because Skype is shutting down soon.
======
@Rhythm_Rev
May 6, 2025 · 11:41 PM UTC
Have you attempted exporting your Skype data? Even with Skype being shut down, Microsoft may very well have this data on their servers still. Microsoft has a webpage walking through the steps to exporting your data and then reading the exported file: https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/skype/how-do-i-export-or-delete-my-skype-data-84546e00-2fef-4c45-8ef6-3a27f83242cc
======
@thesunmous5
May 7, 2025 · 12:06 AM UTC
Thank you for this link. I’m looking into this right now.
======
@JarringInnit
May 12, 2025 · 4:21 AM UTC
been a few days and nothing, i got mine in 15 minutes
////////////

To do: archive the text of Cayci's testimony, cover more arguments made by Bonk/BF, make the initial summary of events more detailed