From the spark.money docs

"There are no bridges, external consensus, or sequencers. Users can enter and exit the network freely, with funds always non-custodial and recoverable on L1 via a unilateral exit which depends on Bitcoin and no one else."

Is this not true?

"This security is achieved through a fundamental action required of SOs: forgetting the operator key after a transfer. If an operator follows this protocol, the transferred funds are secure, even against future coercion or hacking. Spark strengthens this model by using multiple operators, ensuring that as long as one (or the required threshold) deletes their key, users remain secure and have perfect forward security."

"In a cooperative exit, the user and SE work together to create a new transaction that spends directly from the deposit transaction to the user’s desired Bitcoin address. This is the most efficient and cost-effective method, as it requires only a single on-chain transaction.

The unilateral exit process ensures that users always have control over their funds, even if the SE becomes unavailable or malicious. This is a critical aspect of Spark’s self-custody design, providing users with the security and sovereignty that Bitcoin was designed to offer."

So if at least one "spark operator" is honest and deletes the operator key after a transfer... There is no confiscation of funds? How is that verifiable?

https://docs.spark.money/learn/withdrawals