Sadie Flores, a Kentucky middle school teacher and mother, is accused of grooming a student in what authorities say was an improper relationship. Causing a profound stir with the mystery lurking beneath interactions that were impeccably proper.

Sadie Flores, a Kentucky middle school teacher and mother, is accused of grooming a student in what authorities say was an improper relationship. Causing a profound stir with the mystery lurking beneath interactions that were impeccably proper.

A teacher accused of secret meetups, FaceTimes, and messages with a 14-year-old student. And that may just be the beginning. Sadie Flores is a wife, a mom, and a teacher now accused of grooming a child. What police say a parent found when they allegedly went through their child’s  phone that made authorities get involved and put a new law that has just been on the books for a couple of weeks  into action, putting this teacher behind bars. We’re on the case.

 Presented by Law and Crime. I’m Chris Stewart. It really feels like every single week we are covering a story like this one. A story about a teacher who crosses the line with a student. A teacher who seems on the outside to have their life together. Someone who at home is a spouse. someone who at home’s a parent, but now they’re in jail accused of violating the sacred trust that a community instills in them.

 Those are the accusations that this teacher, Satie Flores, is now facing. And I am always confused as to how someone gets into the position that Flores is now in facing allegations, and they are just allegations at this point. She’s innocent until proven guilty, but they are allegations accusing her of a potential sex crime with a middle schooler. So, take a look at this.

 This is the Facebook post that features Flores prominently on a law enforcement agency’s page. And this is taking place in Graves County, Kentucky. I want you to look at this picture that the local sheriff included in his post about Satie Flores. And you can just see the anguish on her face.

 You have to imagine this picture was taken right as she learned of what she was going to be accused of. And she’s probably coming to grips with the truth that her life will never be the same if what she’s accused of is true. I just got the uniform citation out of Graves County and it lays out some shocking information about what police say led to these charges and what the mom of the alleged victim says that she found on a phone, including potential late night conversations between a teacher and a student.

 Now, there is a twist to this case. Kentucky has a new law that is related to grooming, and this law just went into effect last month. It’s weeks old and the law is being applied here as a felony. And before I break down that part of the case, I want to back up for a second and talk about Flores. Because for as shocking as it may be that any teacher would cross the line with a student, it is even more shocking when you just see who she appears to have been at home.

 A loving wife and a loving mom. She appears to have a young daughter. She appears to have married her high school sweetheart. She posts regularly about her family on social media. As you can see here, she’s active in her church. And it also appears she was really proud of what she did for a living. She was a teacher. Here’s her post from the start of last school year.

And you can see her name prominently displayed outside her classroom. Flores was a teacher at Graves County Middle School. It’s a public school located in a rural part of Kentucky and it’s in the southwest corner of the state, not far from the Tennessee border. And the charge she is facing is a grooming charge.

 Now, what we know about Flores is that she claims to have been an LBD teacher. That was on her Facebook page at Graves County Middle School. And LBD means really the same thing as a special education teacher according to Northern Kentucky University. and they write in a post about that line of work saying they teach preK through 12th grade students who have learning disabilities such as dyslexia, disgraphia and dcalcula or behavioral emotional disorders such as ADHD, cerebral palsy, anxiety, depression or schizophrenia.

 So we are talking about some of the most vulnerable students who she was in charge of looking after and teaching. Now it is unclear if the victim in this case was a member of her special needs class or it was just another student at the school. We also know that this teacher was a volleyball coach at one point in time at this middle school.

 It also appears she played volleyball in college. So, she was very active outside the classroom. But let’s get into how Flores, this wife and mom, became the target of a sex crimes investigation. The local sheriff says that his agency first learned that Flores was having what he calls an improper relationship with a student through the school district.

 And the allegations were disturbing and the allegations were serious. and the school district calls the local authorities to get involved. Deputies then seized electronics. They say they did several interviews and they also say they interviewed Flores and after that she was put under arrest. So here’s the uniform citation that we just got in.

 It says the parent of a 14-year-old student went through their phone and reportedly found messages between her child and Flores. Investigators say the messages quote were determined that were not to be of a legitimate purpose and were not school related. But there’s more. The parent also says there were multiple incoming phone calls that were later identified as FaceTimes that had occurred multiple times in the late evening hours that the parent wasn’t aware of.

 Now, on the next page of this citation, investigators write that Flores allegedly communicated with this minor on multiple social media platforms. quote attempting to manipulate the minor and expressed feelings of love and admiration more so than just a student teacher relationship. It was also determined that they met in secret before a school function that Flores was not part of, but she lived close by.

 Quote, “It was also determined that unauthorized, untraceable communications had been conducted at least 4 days prior to the waiver that was signed by the parents of the minor that has since been revoked.” Investigators have submitted preservation requests for the above Snapchat and Tik Tok social media accounts, and the investigation is ongoing.

 So, more charges could be coming with what authorities potentially find on those accounts. Now, Flores is charged with grooming a minor. That is a class D felony in Kentucky. And that law is less than one month old. The crime that Flores is charged with became a crime on July 15th. That’s it. It defines grooming as an adult over the age of 18 targeting a minor quote with the intent to entice, coerc, solicit, or induce the minor to engage in sexual conduct with the person or another person.

 It goes on to say that it takes into account a trust violation that happens when a teacher crosses the line as she is accused of. It reads, quote, “Being a person in a position of authority or position of special trust, he or she engages in grooming behavior directed at a minor who is under 18 years old with the intent to entice, coersse, solicit, or induce the minor to engage in sexual conduct with a person or another person or develop an intimate or secretive relationship with the minor.

 Now, with how the law is written and the fact that she is charged with this felony, a D-class felony, that takes into account and accuses her of being improper with a student who is under the age of 14. Part of the law actually states it could be more serious depending on the age. If a person was to groom a minor under the age of 12 and you’re a teacher, it would have gone to a class C felony.

 But class D still a very serious crime where she would face potentially between 1 and 5 years in prison if she is found guilty. And I know we have a long way to go until we get to that point. Now you think of the impact that cases like this can have on entire families just 4 days before the law that Flores was charged with went into effect.

 When you look at her Facebook page, it appears that she was carrying on in this life that she was living where she was at a church with her child. But then days later, this law goes into effect. And then just a couple weeks later, she is put under arrest. And you see the mugsh shot here from the Graves County Jail where she spent the weekend.

 Now, this is the statement that the superintendent of the Graves County School District put out in the wake of Flores’s arrest. It says, quote, “District administration was made aware of an allegation involving a teacher at Graves County Middle School. School officials immediately reported this information to the Graves County Sheriff’s Department for investigation.

We have since been informed that as a result of that investigation, charges have been filed against this teacher. Because this is an ongoing legal and personnel matter, we are limiting the information we can publicly share. However, we want to assure our families that the safety and well-being of our students is our highest priority.

 We take any allegation involving the safety of a child or the professional conduct of an employee extremely seriously and will continue to cooperate fully with law enforcement and the appropriate authorities. Our commitment remains to providing every student with a safe, supportive, and effective learning environment.

 We are grateful to the Graves County Sheriff’s Department for their professionalism and assistance throughout this matter, and we appreciate the continued trust and support of our students, families, and community. Now, the sheriff says that Flores was taken to a local jail and then was transferred to an outofcount facility.

 This case still has a long way to go, but if Flores is found guilty of the charge she’s facing, this grooming a minor charge, she could spend between 1 and 5 years in prison and a fine of up to $10,000. According to WKRCTV, this grooming law was proposed after a music pastor sexually abused a young boy in Northern Kentucky.

 Authorities say that relationship started with the pastor building a relationship, grooming the student online before things became physical. And supporters of this law say that it’s very important to put in steps to make grooming a crime to keep up with widespread cell phone use. And these laws need to be in place in hopes of preventing sexual abuse before it begins.

 Now, according to a group named Enough Abuse, 20 states have passed laws defining grooming. There’s 18 states, Kucky’s one of them, that criminalize grooming. Now, it’s unclear how strong the evidence is in this case against Sadi Flores, but we will get more information to provide you as we continue to reach out to local agencies in Kentucky.

 And of course, Flores is innocent until proven guilty. Joining us now is Chris Clattz, sex abuse attorney with Alto Wick, Crease, and Overhols. Always great to have you here on Law and Crime. And you know, this case very disturbing um if the accusations are true based on the law. There’s very limited information at this point we have.

 But the fact that this law is being used, I think is really interesting because we often hear about grooming and the concerns about it. Um, when you look at this law, what stands out to you as someone who does work in the sex abuse space?  Well, so my my hats off to the legislature um for coming up with a, you know, a a step towards trying to protect kids.

 uh anytime uh the legislature is trying to do something proactive to prevent harm to children or v vulnerable people. Um my hats off to the Kentucky legislature for putting something in place like this. Uh having said that, you know, it’s uh when you are doing something that’s new and this statute that this young teacher has been charged under is brand new.

 It just went into effect. It appears in in Kentucky in July of of this year. And so anytime you have a new statute and you have to det define something that can be as broad as grooming, uh you know, there can be some difficulties with the definition because you don’t want to uh accidentally or you don’t want to accuse a teacher who’s not doing something that’s actually nefarious with something um you know that can be so impactful on a career.

But I think that it’s you know kind of like you and I were chatting with chatting with each other about a while ago. You know, you kind of know it when you see it. Um, and it’s one of those things that’s difficult to actually put down on paper as to define, but I think the legislature has done, you know, their best shot at this point.

 And so my hats off to him.  Yeah. I mean, typically like in in, you know, how does the definition, you know, I know there’s a couple states out there that have like criminal charges related to grooming and and we’ve seen cases where grooming, you know, kind of that term is associated with sexual abuse. Um, in this case, it’s unclear at this point.

 doesn’t seem like there was any physical sexual abuse that’s being um alleged at this point, but typically what do you define as grooming and how can that vary just depending on the state where where you know a crime may take place?  Sure. And you know, Florida has its own, you know, fairly recent grooming law that that’s gone into effect as well and it’s a little bit different than this one.

 Um, but the but the the intent is to stop adults from engaging in conversations with children that are sexually inappropriate or you know if you I know that one of the pieces of language in the statute is to is that uh you know to not have any type of secretive relationship. Um, I think that there’s, you know, an instance where you may have communication through an established line like a school email where you have back and forth conversations about something that can be tracked.

 There seems to be an exception for that in this statute in Kentucky. Um, but what I think they’re trying to discourage is maybe a teacher and a student having a Snapchat communication or an Instagram communication or a Discord communication um that might be secretive. And so even something as simple as having a nonsexual outside conversation with the child that is not through an approved school use um email or communication device could potentially be, you know, considered grooming if you’re trying to establish a secretive relationship with

the child under the statute. So, it’s there’s pretty broad power on on the part of the police and the prosecuting attorneys to look at something that could be conduct that’s just trying to establish a relationship with the child that’s not even sexual yet. That could potentially fall as under the grooming statute in Kentucky as well from what I’m reading.

 Yeah. And like when you look at that because I also think like on on one hand I mean how many times do we see cases and sadly we’ve talked about several of like sex abuse cases where you’re like man I wish someone could have stepped in before it got to this point. And we’ve heard I mean Snapchat is an app that we often hear about where you know oh this teacher ended up being in a communication with you know this student over Snapchat and then you know suddenly one thing led to another and then they they crossed the line with a student you

know at the same time like how can that law be a bit of a challenge where I mean we all had teachers growing up where maybe you had you know that special relationship in a nonsexual way not in a way that was crossing the line just as each had a profound impact on your life. It seems like some of these laws like they could apply to relationships as grooming and building a relationship and have perhaps not the intent that maybe those who would support the law would want.

 Yeah. And and I’ll read the line from the statute. This is a 5 510.160 grooming a minor which is Kentucky statute number. Um section 1B2 says um that if there was an intent to quote develop an intimate or secretive relationship with the minor that could be criminal conduct. And so if you have an outside of school communication with a child, um, and it’s, you know, could be couched as being secretive, even if it’s nonsexual, um, it could be something that could raise a red flag under this particular, you know, statutory scheme. And so, you

know, hopefully the people who are reviewing the cases and the prosecutors and the police officers are going to use, you know, their best judgment um and make sure not to inappropriately charge somebody in the situation like you said where everybody has everybody has one of those teachers as a child that was impactful on them.

 Um that you remember that you may have had more communication with outside of school than you did um with others. And it doesn’t mean anything bad was happening or anything sexual was happening. It’s just, you know, that’s just how human nature is. you you build relationships with people in different ways. Um you don’t want to see teachers getting charged for that either if if this law gets could potentially be abused.

 And again, I don’t I hope that it won’t be. Um and I think the intent of the statute is is very good and and I commend again any legislators for putting protections in place for children. So I’m not being hyperritical. You just always have to be careful when you’re doing something new that it doesn’t get used in a way that it was not intended to.

 The the term intimate um like legally speaking because when I hear intimate you think sexual um when it comes to like a courtroom and and you know and and laws where like how does the law see the word intimate when that’s used in in a you know a new piece of of uh a new law like what we’re seeing here? That’s a really good question and I’ve got the and I I think you do too.

 I’ve got a copy of the law printed out here and a lot of times when legislators write a law they will actually have a definition for a word like that which can have so many meanings. The word intimate can have a ton of meanings. I mean it can be an intimate sexual relationship or I mean it can be an inter you know um you know an intimate relationship you know just between friends right so in humanity the definition of intimate can have several meanings it’s unusual to me that I don’t see a definition of intimate in the statutory scheme that

I’ve reviewed now there may be another piece to the statute I’ve printed out the main piece uh there may be another piece to the statute that I haven’t seen that actually defines sentiment or there may be something in the Kentucky code that defines sentiment, but I would suspect that they would not be looking at just a close relationship that is nonsexual.

 I would hope that the interpretation would be that it would be a close relationship that has some notes or underpinnings of sexuality tied with it. One of the things that, you know, I get frustrated with in covering these stories, and we do so many, it’s it’s not just the impact on the victim, um, the impact on families and and even the families I think of the suspect, you know, and the impact impact on them.

 I mean, these these rock lives, but I also think of like, you know, when I was growing up, you know, if there was, say, a kid on like my high school football team that had a tough, you know, tough situation at home and you had a coach that, you know, would be the person to take them to practice or or even in in some cases help, you know, with homework and help like that could be seen as crossing the line now in the world that we’re living in because there’s so many of these cases where you do have a predator and we’ll see what the

accusations are in this case. I’m speaking more generally, but it’s like how have you seen like these cases that are now reported on more? And it’s hard to believe that they’re happening at the same clip they were before. Maybe we’re hear about them more. I just feel like I talk about them every single week.

 Like just having an impact on educators in general and the 99% of them that are not predators um compared to the stories that we talk about.  Yeah. I think that as laws like this become more common in the United States, I think that teachers are going to be much more careful about the types of communications that they have, they will probably um not, you know, I I bet most school policies are that you don’t, you know, friend children on Snapchat or Instagram or Facebook.

 I bet most schools have that policy in place. most of the ones that I’ve seen do. But I think teachers will be even more careful about that type of communication and probably only using school emails to communicate with kids. Um uh and you know that it’s better as a teacher if you can have something that’s tracked so you can say no, I only had communication, you know, through our approved school channels and and be able to kind of lean back on that as a teacher.

 But I bet teachers will be more careful as these laws come into play  when it comes to some of these new laws. like what are some of the ch and I know we’ve we’ve been kind of talking about that where a law can be interpreted in a lot of different ways but when a law is so new and she has been charged with a class D felony I think that’s 1 to 5 years in prison that she could face if found guilty of this and we’ll see what the other details come out in this investigation but what are some of the challenges like once it gets to the point of a prosecutor you know is taking

this new law and actually applying it in a courtroom um what are some of the growing pains that come with something like Sure. So, one, you know, when you always hope as a citizen who’s, you know, rooting for, you know, the right thing to happen, you always have hope that they pick a solid case. So, I know that this case indicated that they had taken um some uh electronic devices, likely her cell phone or computer.

 Um hopefully they have picked a strong case where there is strong evidence of grooming in the you know, communication history, whether it’s text or whether it’s email. hopefully that is there in the either the phone or the computer that they took to evaluate of the teacher and the student. Um so the the state and the police should pick strong cases um to make sure that there’s not really a doubt like you’re going to look at this and say oh they’re talking about meaning to you know make out or they’re meaning to you know uh you know show

each other body parts or talking about naked pictures or something like that. That’s a strong case. But if there is some ambiguity in the communication, just like if the texts are, “Hey, I missed you today. You know, I’m looking forward to seeing you. You know, let’s, you know, maybe I’ll see you at the Starbucks that’s next to the school.

” Could that be grooming? You know, perhaps, you know, you and I have seen cases where communication starts out simple like that where there’s nothing pushing sexuality. You’re just testing a person’s a child’s willingness to communicate with an adult. So, so the grooming can start out, you know, innocent um and and build into something.

 So, you just really hope that as these new statutes come out, they pick strong cases. If it’s a weak case, the step for the defense lawyer would be to file a motion to declare the statute unconstitutional because it’s vague. Um, vagueness in a statute can be a basis for a criminal defense lawyer to challenge a statute and say, “Hey, it’s unconstitutionally vague.

” Nobody can know what intimate communication is. It’s hard for anybody to know um that. And generally in in these types of crimes, you have to be able to put pick out the intent. Um, this is an intent crime. Um, and so, you know, they look at the intent of the communicator.  Yeah. And and I wonder I mean there’s I mean how many cases you know again I’ll say it again where we look at like the pattern that’ll be laid out by law enforcement and it’s like you have this moment where you’re like man if you if there could have been someone that could

have come in and stopped this Snapchat friend request from happening. You know this victim wouldn’t have been abused. But then at the same time it’s like nobody can see into the future like that unfortunately until we have the benefit of hindsight. Um, with that said, I mean, how often in the cases do you see like is there this pattern of grooming that can often lead to um, sadly the physical sexual abuse that we’ll talk about?  Almost I would say more than 98% of the cases there’s some type of grooming. Um,

it’s very rare unless there’s a unless there in the cases where there’s not just plain out force forcible sexual contact where, excuse me, where grown-ups are are um trying to see if there’s an opening with the child. Um, there’s almost always grooming of some sort. Um, you know, outside of those cases where there’s just straight up, you know, forcible, you know, sexual batteries that take the grooming out there, there’s almost almost always a grooming.

 And it’s it’s s simple things starting out like, you know, hey, how’s your day going? Reaching out, you know, when you’re not reaching out about a school, you know, subject. You’re just checking in with the person. That could be grooming. Um, you know, taking somebody like you were talking about, you know, earlier, maybe there’s a coach that picks a kid up and takes them back and forth to practices sometimes.

 That could be grooming. Or it might not be grooming. It kind of you kind of don’t know until you see what the end intent is. So, it it is it is difficult, but there’s almost always grooming of some sort.  Yeah. And it’s just uh you know disturbing case just based off the the small information that we have um at this point.

 It appears from the law that the victim is either 14 or younger. Um we’ll see how this case plays out and the new information that comes out. Chris Clots, always great to have you here on Law and Crime. Thanks for taking the time to be with us.  Yeah, thanks for having me, Chris.  That will do it for On the Case presented by Law and Crime.

 Subscribe to us on YouTube and Spotify and we’re also streaming on Peacock. I’m Chris Stewart. We’ll see you next time.