Onision/Damages
August 27, 2019: Sarah Publicly States She Wishes For Violence To Be Inflicted on Onision By Her Own Hands
During her August 27, 2019 public livestream, Sarah stated that she had previously wrestled and challenged Onision to a boxing match.
Sarah stated:
- “I used to wrestle. I challenge Onision to a boxing match.”
The challenge occurred near the end of an approximately ninety-minute broadcast in which Sarah publicly discussed Onision, Lucas, their sexual history, and private events involving the household.
A Public Physical Challenge, Not an Expression of Fear
Sarah did not present herself as too frightened to confront Onision.
She publicly:
- named him directly
- challenged him to a physical contest
- invoked her prior wrestling experience
- made the challenge before a live audience
- continued publicly mocking and confronting him
- showed no concern that he could prevent her from speaking
The statement placed Sarah in the role of challenger and Onision in the role of the person being challenged.
That posture materially conflicts with the later portrayal that Sarah remained psychologically dominated by Onision or too afraid to oppose him.
Consistent With Sarah’s Surrounding Public Conduct
The boxing challenge was not an isolated moment.
During the same public campaign, Sarah:
- portrayed Onision as afraid of her
- wrote “lol be mad”
- challenged him to “say whatever” he wanted
- told him to “bring it”
- publicly discussed their sexual relationship
- collaborated with Ayalla Karina
- participated in jokes about having sex with Onision
- conducted an extended public “tell-all”
- described herself as free to “say whatever I want”
The boxing challenge continued the same confident and confrontational pattern.
Sarah was not attempting to avoid Onision or remove herself from public conflict. She was repeatedly provoking, challenging, and escalating it.
Conflict With the Claimed-Damages Narrative
Sarah later alleged severe psychological harm, fear, coercion, intimidation, and emotional control.
Her conduct on August 27, 2019 shows that, at that time, she was willing to publicly confront Onision and challenge him physically before an audience.
The exhibit is relevant because Sarah’s own behavior showed:
- confidence in opposing Onision
- willingness to provoke a response
- no visible hesitation about direct confrontation
- enjoyment of the public conflict
- active participation in escalating the controversy
The challenge does not merely show that Sarah was willing to discuss Onision.
It shows her publicly presenting herself as prepared to meet him in a physical competition.
Relevance to Harm Caused to Onision
The public challenge also contributed to the atmosphere of hostility surrounding Onision.
Sarah’s campaign was not limited to describing past events. It included:
- personal insults
- public taunting
- invitations to continued conflict
- efforts to embarrass Onision
- portrayals of him as weak or afraid
- a direct public boxing challenge
- wishing Onision's cancer, the same cancer that killed his grandfather, return to Onision after he survived it twice
This conduct encouraged audiences to treat the dispute as entertainment and confrontation rather than a private matter.
It should therefore be considered both when evaluating Sarah’s claimed fear and when documenting the public hostility directed toward Onision.
Source
Sarah’s August 27, 2019 YouNow livestream, approximately 01:27:17–01:27:39.
Original account: https://www.younow.com/sarahbear8500
Preserved YouTube upload: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dc2UDXaZzDk
Related evidence:
- Sarah’s public “tell-all” livestream
- Sarah portrays Onision as afraid of her
- Sarah: Defamation Claims
January 5, 2021: CPS Finds the Physical-Abuse Allegation Against Onision “Unfounded”
On January 5, 2021, the Washington State Department of Children, Youth, and Families notified Onision of the result of a Child Protective Services investigation.
The letter states that CPS received a report on or about November 5, 2020 alleging that Onision had abused or neglected:
- “your child or a child in your care.”
The alleged conduct was identified as:
- “Physical abuse”
After investigating, CPS concluded:
- “The investigation determined that the allegations of abuse and neglect against you are Unfounded.”
What “Unfounded” Meant
The agency defined its conclusion directly in the letter:
- “When an allegation is ‘Unfounded,’ it means that CPS investigated the allegation and, based on the information available, has determined that it was more likely than not that the alleged abuse or neglect did not occur, or that there was insufficient evidence to determine whether the alleged child abuse did or did not occur.”
The official result was therefore not a substantiated or founded finding against Onision.
It was:
- Unfounded
Harm to the Household
The CPS report forced the household to undergo an official child-abuse investigation during the height of the public accusation campaign.
Regardless of the investigation’s result, such a report creates immediate and serious consequences:
- scrutiny of the household
- questioning concerning the children and their care
- fear that the family could be separated
- time spent responding to allegations
- emotional distress for both parents
- disruption of ordinary family life
- permanent documentation of another accusation requiring investigation
- pressure to prove innocence concerning conduct that CPS did not substantiate
The damage was not limited to Onision’s online reputation. The accusations reached the family home and triggered state involvement concerning the children.
The Public Narrative Did Not Match the Official Result
At the time of the report, Sarah, Regina, and their public supporters were promoting an increasingly severe narrative portraying the household as abusive, dangerous, predatory, and criminal.
The resulting CPS investigation did not validate that portrayal.
Instead, after investigation, the agency classified the physical-abuse allegation as unfounded.
This result is consistent with the broader official record in which:
- police cleared the original allegations with no evidence of criminal activity
- Sarah repeatedly stated privately that nothing illegal had happened
- Sarah told police she had no sexual contact with Onision or Lucas while underage
- investigators were unable to establish that Sarah was the victim of a crime
- CPS did not substantiate the physical-abuse allegation involving the household’s children
The public campaign produced another investigation, but the investigation did not produce the finding the accusers’ narrative suggested it should.
Repeated Investigations Were Themselves a Form of Damage
An unfounded conclusion does not undo the burden imposed by the report.
The household still had to live through:
- the accusation
- contact from CPS
- investigation of the family
- uncertainty concerning the children
- the possibility that online allegations could influence government action
- the emotional and practical cost of responding
- the continued public circulation of claims after the investigation failed to substantiate them
The pattern matters. Public accusations repeatedly generated outside scrutiny, while official investigations repeatedly failed to establish the alleged criminal or abusive conduct.
The process itself became part of the harm.
Source
Washington State Department of Children, Youth, and Families.
Child Protective Services investigation-results letter dated January 5, 2021.
The report was received on or about November 5, 2020.
Finding:
- Unfounded
Related evidence: