What is the provenance of the 2014–2015 photos of Erika and JT Massey (photographer, publication credits, and licensing)?

1. Provenance and dating: where and when the photos first surfaced

The photographs began circulating widely on X/Twitter and other platforms in mid-December 2025 with multiple outlets reporting the images date from 2015 and earlier 2014 context provided by Erika’s own magazine interview, which mentioned JT Massey by name in 2014, anchoring the couple’s public presence to that period ^{[2] [4]}. Reporting consistently places the photos’ origin in the mid‑2010s era rather than being newly created content, and social posts that reignited interest explicitly referenced 2015 as the shoot year ^{[2] [5]}.

2. Photographer and studio credits: Lunabear/Luna Bear Studios as the visible source

The immediate provenance reported by multiple outlets points to Lunabear (also rendered “Luna Bear”) Studios as the account that originally shared the couple images online, with a health journalist’s post showing screenshots from that studio feed cited as the spark for viral claims that the images were engagement photos ^[1]. News summaries say that screenshots from Lunabear were circulated by a blogger/journalist and that, following attention, the studio removed its social accounts — a fact cited as evidence the images had been posted publicly by a local photography studio rather than only existing in private albums ^{[1] [6]}.

3. Publication credits beyond the studio: magazine text vs. photographic publishing

Erika’s 2014 profile in Arizona Foothills Magazine, which named “JT Massey” in a first‑person description of her ideal day, is cited across reporting to corroborate the relationship and timeline but does not itself appear to be the source of the 2015 portrait images now circulating ^{[2] [7] [3]}. Outlets note that some online commentators suggested the portraits might have been modeling or event photography for which the studio retained publishing control, while others treated the shots as personal/engagement portraits; the sources do not produce a contemporaneous magazine page, photo credit line, or a recognized press publication that originally ran the pictured frames ^{[3] [2]}.

4. Licensing, ownership and public record: what the reporting does — and does not — establish

None of the supplied reporting includes a licensing statement, EXIF data, contract, or a registered copyright claim tied to these images; instead the public trail in the sources is social screenshots and a studio account that later went offline, leaving no clear public record of who holds commercial rights or what license — if any — was attached when the images were first posted ^{[1] [4]}. Without direct access to the studio’s original post, raw files, or a licensing database entry, the available sources only establish that Lunabear/Luna Bear Studios shared pictures online in 2015 and later removed those accounts, and they do not document formal sale, agency representation, or syndicated publication ^[1].

5. How provenance became entangled with viral narratives and why caution is warranted

The photographic provenance reported here has been folded into broader narratives about Erika’s relationship history, with some outlets and social posts asserting an engagement or marriage while others emphasize that the photos could simply be modeling or engagement-style portraits posted by a photographer ^{[8] [3]}. Reporting also notes political and reputational stakes — Erika’s later public role and marriage to Charlie Kirk — that amplify interest and incentive for rapid conclusions, but the documentation in the sources stops short of proving engagement, licensing, or formal publication beyond social screenshots and a referenced studio feed ^{[1] [6]}. Readers should therefore treat the Lunabear/Luna Bear social posts as the best-documented provenance in these sources while recognizing the absence of formal licensing records or definitive publication credits in the public reporting provided ^{[1] [4]}.