Regina/Damages

Damages and Causation Review

Regina: Claimed Harm and Damages

Regina’s claimed injuries compared with her documented preexisting mental-health history, statements that Onision’s work helped her, affectionate communications, later public conduct, media participation, and financial interest.

Related: Grooming · Complete Record · Damage to Onision and Lucas

April 27, 2012: Regina Says Onision’s Forum Kept Her From Suicide and Offers Him Thousands of Dollars Without Receiving a Reply

Regina initiated contact with Onision, credited his video and forum with interrupting her suicidal thoughts, professed her support, and offered to pay thousands of dollars toward his expenses.

On April 27, 2012, Regina sent Onision an unsolicited email after watching his video about overcoming suicidal thoughts.

Regina wrote:

“I live my life to excel on the Onision Forums, because on there I’m happy.”

She said that when she began thinking of ways to die:

“I instantly get on there.”

Regina disclosed that she had experienced moderate-to-severe depression and stated:

“every day, I just want to die.”

She nevertheless described Onision’s content and community as a source of relief—not harm.

Regina then offered extraordinary financial assistance:

“I’d wish to donate half of what you owe for a year or two”

and:

“I’ll be buying a ton of Onision shirts to help with profits.”

She concluded:

“You don’t deserve this torture.”

and signed the email:

“Love and Support, Regina”

What the Evidence Establishes

The email documents that:

• Regina initiated the attempted contact
• her severe depression and suicidal thoughts already existed
• she credited Onision’s video and forum with helping her survive those thoughts
• she expressed love, support, and admiration toward Onision
• she voluntarily offered him potentially thousands of dollars
• the preserved email record shows no reply or encouragement from Onision

This directly conflicts with a narrative in which Onision sought Regina out, created her psychological distress, financially exploited her, or initiated a coercive relationship.

At this stage, the record shows the opposite: Regina was an intensely attached viewer attempting to create direct contact with Onision, while Onision did not reciprocate.

Source

Email from Regina to: onisionproject@gmail.com

Dated April 27, 2012, at 6:31 a.m. The screenshot was preserved from Onision’s email account.

Related evidence:

• Regina: Grooming Allegations

October 2–9, 2016: Regina Initiates Contact, Says She Misses Lucas, and Receives Brief Responses

In October 2016, Regina initiated contact with Lucas, said she was worried about him and missed him, and later asked whether he still had a P.O. box. Lucas responded briefly and did not reciprocate Regina’s emotional language.

On October 2, 2016, Regina contacted Lucas after watching a video published by Onision concerning public controversy surrounding the household.

Regina wrote:

“I saw Greg's video and I'm just worried abt you and all the bs drama..”

She then added:

“And I miss you.”

Lucas did not respond with similar emotional or romantic language. He replied:

“Well we are still together”

Regina clarified that she was referring to the public criticism surrounding Lucas:

“I mean that's fantastic but all the bs from other people since its all so public”

On October 9, Regina initiated contact again and asked:

“Do you still have a P.O. box?”

Lucas answered only:

“No”

Regina replied:

“Dang. Okay.”

What the record directly shows

The messages show Regina independently initiating contact with Lucas and expressing concern and personal attachment.

The exchange establishes that:

• Regina told Lucas that she was worried about him.
• Regina voluntarily stated that she missed him.
• Regina expressed support regarding the public criticism directed at the household.
• Regina initiated another conversation one week later concerning Lucas’s P.O. box.
• Lucas answered Regina with short, restrained responses.
• Lucas did not reciprocate Regina’s statement that she missed him.
• Lucas did not solicit money, gifts, sexual communication, or a private meeting in the displayed exchange.
• The messages contain no threat, pressure, enticement, or demand from Lucas.

Why it matters

Regina’s later allegations portray Lucas as the person who pursued, enticed, groomed, or emotionally manipulated her.

This contemporaneous exchange records the opposite communication pattern.

Regina initiated the interaction, expressed that she missed Lucas, communicated concern for him, and attempted to continue contact. Lucas’s responses were brief and did not encourage or mirror Regina’s emotional attachment.

The exchange does not show Lucas attempting to deepen the relationship, isolate Regina, introduce sexual subjects, or exploit her expressed concern. Instead, the available messages show Regina pursuing communication while Lucas remained comparatively disengaged.

The record therefore conflicts with any portrayal of this particular interaction as an example of Lucas aggressively pursuing Regina or cultivating emotional dependence. It documents Regina voluntarily seeking his attention and expressing attachment without corresponding encouragement from Lucas.

Source

Facebook Messenger exchange between Regina Alonso and Lucas dated October 2 and October 9, 2016.

Lucas’s messages appear in gray. Regina’s messages appear in blue.

The screenshot was captured and publicly shared by Regina.

January 8, 2019: Regina Expresses Support for Lucas and Voluntarily Discusses Returning to Therapy

On January 8, 2019, Regina told Lucas that she was happy for him, emphasized that his well-being mattered to her, and voluntarily disclosed that she planned to return to therapy following a death in her family.

On January 8, 2019, Regina sent Lucas a supportive message concerning his new name and pronouns.

Regina wrote:

“I'm really happy for you, I really like the name too. I feel like it suits you really well.”

She then stated:

“your wellbeing especially with this new name and pronouns”

Regina also voluntarily disclosed that she had recently experienced a death in her family and intended to resume therapy:

“someone close to my family got murdered 6 months or 2 ago and I never had a chance to come out to them before they passed”

She added:

“I'm working on going back to a therapist”

What the record directly shows

The message shows Regina voluntarily communicating with Lucas in a supportive and personally open manner.

The exchange establishes that:

• Regina told Lucas she was happy for him.
• Regina expressed approval of Lucas’s new name.
• Regina stated that Lucas’s well-being mattered to her.
• Regina voluntarily discussed a painful event involving her family.
• Regina stated that she was working toward returning to therapy.
• The visible message contains no accusation that Lucas had harmed, threatened, coerced, or exploited her.
• Regina’s tone toward Lucas was supportive rather than fearful, hostile, or avoidant.

Why it matters

Regina’s later allegations portray Lucas as someone who had previously traumatized, exploited, or psychologically harmed her.

This January 2019 message records Regina communicating with Lucas in a markedly different manner. She expressed happiness for him, affirmed his identity, emphasized concern for his well-being, and voluntarily shared sensitive information about her own emotional state and plans for therapy.

It is relevant to Regina’s contemporaneous conduct and stated relationship with Lucas. At the time of this exchange, Regina did not describe Lucas as a source of fear or harm. She instead treated him as someone whose happiness and well-being mattered to her and with whom she felt comfortable discussing a deeply personal family loss.

The record therefore conflicts with a simple portrayal of Regina as consistently viewing Lucas as her abuser or remaining in contact only through visible fear, coercion, or duress. Her own message shows active support, personal trust, and voluntary emotional disclosure several years after the period addressed by her later allegations.

Source

January 8, 2019 text-message exchange between Regina Alonso and Lucas.

Regina’s message appears in gray. The preceding visible message from Lucas appears in green.

The screenshot was captured from Lucas’s phone.

September 9, 2019: Regina Promotes a “Deplatform Predators” Campaign Alongside Multiple Payment and Monetization Accounts

Regina’s Twitter profile combined her “#DeplatformPredators” campaign with direct links to her Venmo and Linktree accounts, placing fundraising and monetization tools alongside the accusations she promoted against Onision and Lucas.

During Regina’s public campaign against Onision and Lucas, her Twitter profile identified her stated mission as:

“#DeplatformPredators”

The same profile directly advertised Regina’s Venmo account:

“venmo: hahan0bye”

and linked viewers to:

“linktr.ee/hahan0bye”

The profile displayed an audience of approximately 5,301 followers.

Regina’s Linktree directed visitors to Venmo, Cash App, OnlyFans, YouTube, Instagram, and Tumblr, confirming that the financial and promotional link displayed beside her “#DeplatformPredators” profile led to multiple monetization and audience-building platforms under her control.

Regina’s Linktree expanded the financial and promotional structure attached to her campaign.

The page contained direct links to:

• Instagram
• Venmo
• Cash App
• OnlyFans
• YouTube
• Tumblr

The Linktree was publicly displayed on the same Twitter profile Regina used to identify her mission as “#DeplatformPredators.”

What the record directly shows

The combined screenshots show that Regina placed her campaign against Onision and Lucas beside a network of financial, subscription, content, and promotional accounts.

The record establishes that:

• Regina publicly branded her account around a campaign to “deplatform” people she labeled predators.
• Regina directed followers to a Venmo account.
• Regina directed followers to a Linktree page.
• The Linktree included Venmo and Cash App payment accounts.
• The Linktree included an OnlyFans subscription account.
• The Linktree included YouTube, Instagram, and Tumblr accounts.
• Regina promoted these links to an audience of more than 5,300 followers.
• Regina controlled the campaign messaging, the linked accounts, and the pathways through which followers could financially support or subscribe to her content.
• The accusations and Regina’s monetization structure were presented through the same public profile.

Direct contradiction of the Third Amended Complaint

The Third Amended Complaint portrays Regina primarily as a psychologically harmed victim whose public conduct arose from alleged grooming and exploitation by Lucas and Onision.

Regina’s own profiles show her operating an organized accusation campaign while simultaneously directing the resulting audience toward payment accounts, a subscription platform, content channels, and social-media pages under her control.

Regina was not merely recounting an experience.

She was:

• branding a public campaign,
• identifying targets as predators,
• building an audience around those accusations,
• directing followers toward Venmo and Cash App,
• promoting an OnlyFans account,
• and routing traffic toward her YouTube and social-media platforms.

That documented structure shows that Regina’s campaign generated direct pathways to money, subscriptions, content traffic, and audience growth.

Why it matters

Regina’s public campaign and monetization network were not separate.

They appeared together.

Her “#DeplatformPredators” profile sent followers directly to a Linktree containing:

• two payment services,
• a paid subscription platform,
• a video platform,
• and multiple social-media accounts.

This structure gave Regina a direct personal benefit from the attention produced by her accusations against Onision and Lucas.

The more attention the allegations generated, the more people were exposed to Regina’s:

• Venmo,
• Cash App,
• OnlyFans,
• YouTube,
• Instagram,
• and Tumblr accounts.

The screenshots therefore document a financial and promotional infrastructure built directly into Regina’s accusation campaign.

Regina’s later portrayal of herself as merely a harmed individual seeking accountability cannot be separated from the public record showing that she attached payment, subscription, promotional, and audience-building links to the campaign itself.

This evidence fits the broader pattern in which Regina converted accusations against Onision and Lucas into publicity, follower growth, direct payment access, subscription traffic, and promotion for multiple accounts under her personal control.

Source

Screenshots of Regina Alonso’s Twitter profile at @hahan0bye and the linked Linktree page at linktr.ee/hahan0bye.

The Twitter profile displayed the hashtag “#DeplatformPredators,” Regina’s Venmo account, the Linktree address, and approximately 5,301 followers.

The Linktree displayed direct links to Instagram, Venmo, Cash App, OnlyFans, YouTube, and Tumblr.