Sarah/Trafficking

January 15, 2021: Sarah Provides No New Information and Police Again Find No Crime Victim

Sarah provided no new information when police contacted her again in January 2021; the report records that she was over 18, fully consented, and did not appear to be a crime victim.

On January 15, 2021, police contacted Sarah again regarding her relationship with Onision and Lucas.

The report states:

“Sarah seemed surprised that I was following up with her again and told me she did not have any new information to report since we last spoke in March 2020.”

The investigator concluded:

“Based on the information I had obtained at that time, it did not appear Sarah was a victim of a crime in PCSD jurisdiction.”

The report also summarizes Sarah’s earlier account:

“Sarah told me she had been involved in a sexual relationship with Jackson but was over 18 years of age during the relationship and had fully consented to the sexual activity.”

It further records that Sarah:

“was not sure she was a victim of any crime in Pierce County or Washington State.”

The Contradiction

Nearly a year after her first police interview, Sarah still supplied no allegation or new evidence establishing rape, molestation, exploitation of a minor, or any other crime.

The police record remained consistent:

• Sarah was over 18 during the sexual relationship.
• Sarah fully consented to the sexual activity.
• Sarah was unsure that she had been the victim of any crime.
• Sarah provided no new information in January 2021.
• Police again concluded that she did not appear to be a crime victim within their jurisdiction.
• Sarah stood on the narrative she originally told police for almost a year, and had no change in her narrative reported whatsoever.

This directly conflicts with the severe assault narrative Sarah later presented in litigation.

Source

Pierce County Sheriff Department Incident Report 2101900529.1, documenting the January 15, 2021 follow-up with Sarah.

August–November 2017: Sarah Lived in Separate Quarters, Worked at Target, and Reported No Sexual Discussions

Sarah told police that during her 2017 stay she lived in a mother-in-law suite, worked at Target, and had no discussions of a sexual nature with Onision or Lucas.

Sarah told police that she stayed on the Onision household’s property from August through November 2017 while she was still a minor.

The report states that Sarah:

“lived in a mother-in-law suite on their property”

It further records that she:

“worked at a Target store in Puyallup”

Most importantly, Sarah told the investigator:

“there was not any discussion of a sexual nature at the time”

She also said she remained emotionally closer to Lucas than to Onision.

The Contradiction

Sarah’s own police account documents a teenager who had:

• Separate living quarters
• Employment outside the property
• Regular travel to and from a Target store
• Contact with coworkers and the public
• The ability to earn her own income
• No noted isolation, indication of free roam to and from public areas
• No sexual discussions with Onision or Lucas during the visit

This record directly undermines later portrayals of Sarah as confined, sexually trafficked, or kept under constant household control.

She was living in designated quarters on the property, leaving for outside employment, participating in ordinary public life, and reporting that no sexual discussions occurred.

The facts Sarah gave police describe independent movement and nonsexual living arrangements—not sex trafficking or sexual exploitation of a minor.

Source

Pierce County Sheriff Department Incident Report 2005101355.1, documenting Sarah’s account of her August–November 2017 stay.

January 4, 2019: Sarah Says She Did Not Even Meet Lucas Until She Was 16

Sarah rejects a claim that she slept with Lucas at age 14, stating that she had not even met him until she was 16.

On January 4, 2019, Lucas told Sarah:

“Apparently people are saying we slept together when you were 14.”

Sarah immediately responded:

“I didn’t even meet you until I was 16 wtf”

She also stated:

“I’m at work sobbing”

Sarah’s contemporaneous statement directly rejects any claim that Lucas had sexual access to her at age 14. According to Sarah herself, they had not even met at that age.

The Contradiction

The exchange establishes that Sarah originally viewed the underage-sex allegation as an obvious and distressing lie.

Her response was not uncertainty or delayed recognition. She relied on a fixed chronological fact:

“I didn’t even meet you until I was 16”

The message is consistent with Sarah’s other contemporaneous denials of grooming and minor-age sexual contact. It contradicts later efforts to portray her relationship with Lucas as a sexual relationship beginning when she was substantially younger.

Source

January 4, 2019 text messages between Sarah and Lucas.

Lucas’s messages appear in blue and Sarah’s messages appear in gray.

January 5, 2019: Sarah Says the Allegations Would Only Have Credibility if She Made Them

Sarah states that allegations against the Onision household would only have “standing” if she personally made them, recognizing that her own endorsement controlled whether the narrative gained credibility.

On January 5, 2019, Sarah discussed false allegations being spread about her relationship with Lucas and the Onision household.

After Lucas described the campaign as confirmation bias and people changing their stories to fit a narrative, Sarah stated:

“The only way it would have any standing would be if I were the one making the claims not someone who said they had a conversation with me about it over 2 years ago.”

She then challenged the weakness of the existing accusation:

“What kind of evidence did you think that was??”

What Sarah Recognized

Sarah understood that third-party gossip lacked credibility without her endorsement.

Her message establishes that:

• She was not making the accusations at that time
• She regarded the circulating story as unsupported
• She knew her personal endorsement would give the allegations legitimacy
• She understood that she possessed unique power over the public narrative
• She recognized that a claim attributed indirectly to her was not meaningful evidence

This is important because Sarah later became the person making the allegations she had previously rejected.

Her own statement identifies the mechanism by which the narrative could become damaging: the accusations would gain “standing” only if Sarah personally adopted them.

That is exactly what later occurred.

The Contradiction

In January 2019, Sarah treated the allegations as false, unsupported, and incapable of harming the household unless she chose to validate them.

She later supplied that validation by reversing her prior statements and personally adopting accusations that had previously depended on rumor and third-party storytelling.

The message demonstrates that Sarah understood the decisive power of her own words long before she used them against Onision and Lucas.

Source

January 5, 2019 text messages between Sarah and Lucas.

Lucas’s messages appear in blue and Sarah’s messages appear in gray.

January 7, 2019: Sarah Denies Anyone Waited for Her to Turn 18 or Planned a Sexual Relationship

Sarah denies that Lucas waited for her eighteenth birthday or planned a sexual relationship in advance, stating that nobody involved knew the relationship would occur.

On January 7, 2019, Sarah directly rejected the theory that Lucas had spent years waiting for her to become an adult.

Using sarcasm, Sarah wrote:

“No you didn’t plan to lay in wait until my 18 birthday then kidnap me to your sex dungeon.”

She then stated plainly:

“Literally none of us knew this was going to happen”

Sarah also rejected the grooming allegation:

“If you were grooming me I would’ve already figured it out by now lmao”

The Contradiction

Sarah’s contemporaneous account establishes that:

• Nobody was waiting for her eighteenth birthday
• No sexual or romantic relationship had been planned while she was a minor
• Sarah believed the later relationship was unexpected by everyone involved
• Sarah expressly rejected the allegation that Lucas was grooming her
• Sarah believed she was capable of recognizing grooming if it had occurred

These statements directly contradict the later narrative that Onision and Lucas spent years preparing Sarah for a sexual relationship that would begin once she became legally eligible.

Sarah’s own words describe an unplanned adult development—not a concealed grooming operation originating during her childhood.

Source

January 7, 2019 text messages between Sarah and Lucas.

Lucas’s messages appear in blue and Sarah’s messages appear in gray.

January 10, 2019: Regina Says Lucas Was Never Sarah’s Guardian and Publicly Defends Him

Regina stated that Lucas “was never” Sarah’s guardian and publicly defended him after the period in which Regina later alleged that he had victimized her.

On January 10, 2019, Regina publicly wrote:

“he was never her guardian. his choices dont affect you whatsoever so why would it even be relevant to you.”

The statement is direct: Regina rejected the claim that Lucas had ever been Sarah’s guardian.

The Later Reversal

Regina’s 2019 position is especially damaging because her later complaint alleges that Lucas groomed Regina from ages 14 through 17, attempted to bring her to Washington for sex, and then replaced her with Sarah when Regina could not travel.

By January 2019, the entire period of Regina’s later alleged victimization had already passed. Yet Regina was still publicly defending Lucas and correcting people who portrayed him as Sarah’s guardian.

The contradiction is substantial:

• Regina said Lucas was never Sarah’s guardian.
• She publicly defended his actions as irrelevant to the person criticizing him.
• She did so after the period in which she later claimed Lucas had victimized her.
• She later joined litigation portraying Lucas as a groomer and Sarah as his replacement victim.
• The later complaint also relies on guardian-like authority and control over Sarah that Regina expressly denied in 2019.

Regina’s own public record therefore conflicts with both her later description of Lucas and the guardianship narrative used to support Sarah’s claims.

Source

Regina’s public Twitter post dated January 10, 2019.

Original account: https://twitter.com/hahan0bye

Archived account: https://web.archive.org/web/20191127044337/twitter.com/hahan0bye

January 13, 2019: Sarah Admits Concealing Her Feelings for Years to Preserve Access to Lucas

Sarah admits that she concealed her feelings for Lucas for years so they could remain friends, creating a direct credibility problem concerning her later account of the relationship.

During a January 13, 2019 argument, Lucas confronted Sarah about concealing her feelings:

“You lied to me from 2016-late 2018”

Sarah explained why:

“So we could still be friends”

She also stated:

“I told you I liked you years ago”

The Credibility Problem

Sarah directly admits that she concealed the truth about her feelings for years because telling Lucas the truth threatened her continued friendship and access to him.

This establishes that Sarah:

• Had romantic feelings for Lucas for years
• Deliberately denied or concealed those feelings
• Understood that honesty could end the friendship
• Chose deception so she could remain close to Lucas
• Later presented herself as a reliable narrator of the same relationship

This was not a minor or unrelated lie. It concerned the central motive behind Sarah’s continued presence in the household and her pursuit of Lucas.

A witness who admits hiding a material motive for years cannot be treated as a neutral or automatically reliable narrator of that same relationship. Sarah’s later allegations must be measured against her own admission that she was willing to conceal the truth when honesty threatened her desired access to Lucas.

Source

January 13, 2019 text messages between Sarah and Lucas.

Lucas’s messages appear in blue and Sarah’s messages appear in gray.

June 13, 2019: Sarah Again Admits Lying About Her Feelings Because Onision Would Have Kicked Her Out

Sarah admits that she concealed her attraction to Lucas because she believed Onision would remove her from the household if the truth became known.

On June 13, 2019, Sarah again admitted that she had concealed her attraction to Lucas for an extended period.

Sarah wrote:

“You wonder why I lied about liking you for so long...was I supposed to just tell you while I was around so I could give Greg a reason to kick me out or...?”

What Sarah’s Admission Establishes

Sarah’s statement confirms that:

• Her romantic interest originated with her
• She intentionally concealed that interest
• She believed Onision disapproved of her pursuing Lucas
• She expected disclosure to result in her removal from the household
• She lied so she could preserve continued access to Lucas

This directly supports Onision’s position that he acted as a barrier between Sarah and Lucas rather than encouraging, arranging, or cultivating a future sexual relationship.

Sarah’s concern was not that Onision would pressure her into a relationship. Her concern was that Onision would discover what she wanted and prevent it by kicking her out.

The Contradiction

The later grooming narrative portrays the household as deliberately developing Sarah’s attraction and preparing her for a relationship.

Sarah’s contemporaneous explanation is the reverse: she hid her feelings because she knew they were unwelcome and believed Onision would remove her if he discovered them.

This also repeats Sarah’s January 2019 admission that she had lied about her feelings for years so she could remain friends with Lucas. Her own messages establish a sustained pattern of deception designed to preserve proximity to someone she wanted romantically.

Source

June 13, 2019 text messages between Sarah and Lucas.

Lucas’s messages appear in blue and Sarah’s messages appear in gray.

August 27, 2019: Sarah States Neither Onision nor Lucas Ever Kissed Her While She Was Underage

Sarah directly stated during her own livestream that neither Onision nor Lucas ever kissed her while she was underage.

During her August 27, 2019 YouNow livestream, Sarah was asked three direct questions:

“Did Lainey do more than just make out with you, when did you guys first kiss, and did you kiss Greg when you were underage?”

Sarah shook her head and answered:

“I didn’t kiss Greg when I was underage. I didn’t kiss either of them when I was underage.”

The Contradiction

Sarah’s answer removes even kissing from the minor-age timeline.

Her statement establishes that:

• Onision never kissed Sarah while she was underage
• Lucas never kissed Sarah while she was underage
• Sarah publicly denied minor-age physical romantic contact with either person

This directly conflicts with later portrayals of a physical or sexual relationship being cultivated and carried out while Sarah was a minor.

Source

Sarah’s August 27, 2019 YouNow livestream, approximately 00:28:58–00:29:21.

Original YouNow account: https://www.younow.com/sarahbear8500

Preserved full-stream reupload: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dc2UDXaZzDk&themeRefresh=1

August 27, 2019: Sarah Says the Document Was Only a Power of Attorney, Not Foster-Parent Status

Sarah publicly explained that the document was only a power of attorney and did not make Onision or Lucas her foster parents, consistent with the later police finding that she was not under their legal care or custody.

During her August 27, 2019 livestream, Sarah directly addressed the legal arrangement:

“It was only a ‘Power of Attorney,’ so technically, like, they weren’t actually foster parents to me or anything like that.”

Sarah therefore distinguished the limited document from foster care, legal parenthood, or custodial guardianship.

The Contradiction

Sarah’s own statement establishes that:

• The document was described as a power of attorney
• Onision and Lucas were not her foster parents
• The document did not create a parent-child relationship
• Sarah understood that the household did not possess the legal status later attributed to it

The police investigation later reached the same material conclusion: Sarah was not under the legal care or custody of Onision or Lucas.

This directly conflicts with later allegations portraying Sarah as a dependent child legally controlled by the household.

Source

Sarah’s August 27, 2019 YouNow livestream, approximately 01:33:50–01:34:27.

Original YouNow account: https://www.younow.com/sarahbear8500

Preserved full-stream reupload: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dc2UDXaZzDk&themeRefresh=1

See also: Sarah: Police Report

August 27, 2019: Sarah Says She Contacted Lucas Crying and Asked for Help Leaving Her Situation in Michigan

Sarah explained that she contacted Lucas while crying about her situation in Michigan, prompting Lucas to discuss allowing her to live with the household.

During her August 27, 2019 livestream, Sarah explained how the possibility of living with Onision and Lucas originated.

Sarah stated:

“When I was going to move in with them, it was because I was having a really hard time where I was.”

She continued:

“I basically texted Kai from my car, like, crying one night.”

According to Sarah, Lucas responded:

“I’m going to seriously talk to Greg about you living here.”

What Sarah’s Account Establishes

Sarah’s own account places the initiation with her:

• Sarah was experiencing serious difficulties in Michigan
• Sarah contacted Lucas while crying and asking for help
• Lucas responded by discussing the situation with Onision
• The household considered allowing Sarah to live with them because she presented herself as needing assistance
• The living arrangement originated as a response to Sarah’s request for help—not as an effort to lure or recruit her

This directly contradicts the later narrative that Onision and Lucas engineered Sarah’s move for trafficking, sexual exploitation, or coercive control.

Sarah described herself reaching out from Michigan in distress and the household responding with sympathy and an offer of housing.

Source

Sarah’s August 27, 2019 YouNow livestream, approximately 00:40:16–00:41:14.

Original YouNow account: https://www.younow.com/sarahbear8500

Preserved full-stream reupload: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dc2UDXaZzDk&themeRefresh=1

September 3, 2019: Sarah Publicly Tells Onision, “You Do NOT Scare Me” and Challenges Him

Sarah publicly told Onision, “You do NOT scare me,” called him “pathetic,” and posted “EAT MY ASS GREG,” openly challenging and ridiculing him.

On September 3, 2019, Sarah directly addressed Onision in a series of public posts.

She wrote:

“Just wait until I get off work. You do NOT scare me, pussy.”

Sarah then published a private message from Onision describing the emotional damage caused to Lucas, the children, and the household. Her response was:

“ur pathetic @onision”

She followed that with:

“EAT MY ASS GREG”

In related posts, Sarah further challenged Onision to say whatever he wanted and “bring it.”

What Sarah’s Statements Establish

Sarah’s language is direct and unambiguous:

• She expressly stated that Onision did not scare her
• She publicly insulted and challenged him
• She tagged his account to ensure the attacks were directed at him
• She published his private message and mocked his concern for Lucas and the children
• She invited further confrontation rather than avoiding contact
• She presented herself as aggressive, defiant, and fully willing to fight publicly

Her own statement directly refutes the later portrayal that she was too intimidated by Onision to confront him, oppose him, establish boundaries, or speak freely.

This was not private reassurance given while living in the household. Sarah made the statements publicly after the relationship had ended, while openly attacking Onision before a large audience.

Source

Sarah’s public Twitter posts dated September 3, 2019.

Original account: https://twitter.com/notsolillioness

Archived account captures: https://web.archive.org/web/20250000000000*/https://twitter.com/notsolillioness

September 3, 2019: Sarah Publicly Invites Onision to Discuss Her and Challenges Him to “Bring It”

On September 3, 2019, Sarah publicly wrote:

“say whatever you want about me onision. bring it.”

This was an explicit invitation for Onision to respond publicly. Sarah did not ask for privacy, silence, or separation. She challenged him

Sarah publicly invited Onision to say anything he wanted about her and challenged him to “bring it.”

before a public audience and encouraged him to discuss her.

The post reinforces her statement from the same day:

“You do NOT scare me, pussy.”

The Later Contradiction

Sarah later claimed that she wanted to be left alone and objected to Onision publicly discussing the dispute, including through allegations of defamation.

Her contemporaneous words show that she originally welcomed the public confrontation:

• She invited Onision to say whatever he wanted about her
• She challenged him to “bring it”
• She expressly stated that he did not scare her
• She publicly insulted and tagged him
• She published private messages and encouraged the dispute to continue before an audience

Sarah cannot accurately portray the public conflict as something Onision alone initiated when she expressly invited him to speak and challenged him to continue.

Once Sarah publicly opened the dispute, demanded a response, and told Onision to “say whatever you want,” her later attempt to portray his participation in that same public controversy as completely unsolicited becomes directly contradicted by her own post.

The statement also undermines later claims that Sarah avoided Onision out of fear. She openly confronted him, taunted him, and encouraged a public fight.

Source

Sarah’s public Twitter post dated September 3, 2019.

Original account: https://twitter.com/notsolillioness

Archived account captures: https://web.archive.org/web/20250000000000*/https://twitter.com/notsolillioness

October 30, 2019: Sarah States Neither Onision nor Lucas Tried to Kiss Her or Initiate Sexual Contact Before She Turned 18

Sarah directly stated that neither Onision nor Lucas ever tried to kiss her or initiate intimate sexual contact before she turned 18.

During the October 30, 2019 interview, Sarah was asked:

“During that six months when you were 16, there was no intimate sexual contact between you and Kai or you and Greg?”

Sarah answered:

“No, they never, they never tried to like kiss me or anything before I was 18.”

Sarah’s answer is direct and categorical. She stated that:

• No intimate sexual contact occurred while she was 16
• Onision never tried to kiss her while she was underage
• Lucas never tried to kiss her while she was underage
• Neither person attempted sexual contact before she became an adult

The Contradiction

This independently repeats Sarah’s August 2019 livestream statement that she did not kiss either Onision or Lucas while underage.

Her own interviews consistently placed the beginning of physical and sexual contact after she turned 18. That directly conflicts with later allegations portraying the household as engaging in sexual acts with Sarah while she was a minor.

Source

Interview dated October 30, 2019, approximately 00:18:28–00:19:12.

YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l7vma6ynwuy

Internet Archive: https://archive.org/details/have-a-seat-with-chris-hansen-ft.-sarah-discussing-onision

December 24, 2019: Sarah Describes the Arrangement as Medical Power of Attorney, Not Guardianship

Sarah described the document as a medical power of attorney for emergencies—not an agreement making Onision or Lucas her guardians or foster parents.

In a December 24, 2019 Newsweek interview, Sarah was asked:

“When was your power of attorney signed over?”

Sarah answered:

“In early November. My mom went and signed over my medical power of attorney so that if an emergency happened they would have rights... It was for them to take care of me, basically.”

What Sarah’s Statement Establishes

Sarah described a limited medical arrangement:

• Her mother executed the document
• It concerned decisions during a medical emergency
• Sarah called it a “medical power of attorney”
• She did not describe Onision or Lucas as adoptive parents, foster parents, or legal guardians
• The phrase “take care of me” described the practical reason for the document—not a transfer of general custody or parental status

This repeats Sarah’s August 2019 livestream statement that the document was “only” a power of attorney and that the household was not actually her foster family.

It also matches the later police conclusion that Sarah was not under the legal care or custody of Onision or Lucas.

No Legal Guardianship Order Exists

Under Washington law, a person becomes the guardian of a minor only through appointment by a court. A genuine guardianship would therefore produce an official court proceeding, an order appointing the guardian, and letters of guardianship issued by the court clerk.

Some sensitive documents within a guardianship case may be confidential or sealed. The legal appointment itself, however, could not exist solely through an informal household agreement or privately signed medical document.

No guardianship order, court case number, or judicial appointment naming Onision or Lucas as Sarah’s guardians has ever been produced or identified.

The available evidence instead consistently establishes that:

• Sarah described the document as a medical power of attorney
• Sarah publicly stated that Onision and Lucas were not her foster parents
• Regina publicly stated that Lucas was never Sarah’s guardian
• Police determined that Sarah was not under the legal care or custody of Onision or Lucas
• No court-issued guardianship document appears anywhere in the evidentiary record

The guardianship claim is independently testable. Anyone asserting that a legal guardianship existed should be able to identify the court, case number, appointment order, and guardian named by the judge. No such proof has been presented because the arrangement Sarah described was medical authorization—not legal guardianship.

Legal Source

Washington law states that a person becomes guardian for a minor only through appointment by a court: https://app.leg.wa.gov/RCW/default.aspx?cite=11.130.185

Washington law also requires an appointment order and directs the court clerk to issue official letters to the appointed guardian: https://app.leg.wa.gov/RCW/default.aspx?cite=11.130.215

The Contradiction

Sarah’s own repeated descriptions conflict with the later effort to portray the household as possessing broad guardianship authority and legal control over her.

The contemporaneous record identifies a medical document created so someone could act during an emergency. It does not support the later narrative that Onision and Lucas became Sarah’s parents, foster parents, or custodial guardians.

Source

Newsweek interview with Sarah, published December 24, 2019: https://www.newsweek.com/sarah-her-relationship-youtuber-onision-why-did-you-think-this-was-okay-1479119

See also:

• Sarah: Police Report
• Sarah: Grooming