Fayette County man found guilty of soliciting two teen boys online

Pittsburgh Post-Gazette

The defense attorney told the jury his client did nothing illegal — that he never propositioned the two teen boys, and that just because he questioned them about their genitals and offered oral sex does not mean he committed a crime.

But the prosecution told the nine male and three female jurors the opposite.

First, assistant district attorney Daniel Gleixner said, Patrick Onesko, 28, told the 14- and 15-year-old boys on Snapchat that he was a 15year-old girl from Bethel Park. He used the screen nameALAINABP5.

Then, the prosecutor continued, after “grooming” them over a period of weeks, Mr. Onesko admitted his real identity: a former football coach at South Fayette High School. He began talking to themabout their genitals.

And then he asked them not to tell the police.

On Thursday, the jurors found that Mr. Onesko was guilty of all counts against him: solicitation, unlawful contact with a minor and two counts of corruption of minors.

Mr. Onesko, of East Millsboro,Fayette County, also previously coached at California Universityof Pennsylvania.

Allegheny County Common Pleas Judge Alexander Bicket,who presided over the trial, ordered that Mr. Onekso’s bond be revoked. Hewill be sentenced March 1.

The lowest recommended guideline range for solicitation calls for two years in prison, and for unlawful contact,the mitigated sentencing range calls for three. He will also have to register as a sex offender for the rest of his life.

Mr. Onesko, whose trial began Tuesday, was charged in March after the parents of the two boys went to South Fayette police and reported their sons had been having inappropriate conversations with him on the Snapchat messaging app.

In his closing argument, defense attorney Stephen Misko told the jury that the prosecution presented incomplete information. When using Snapchat, the messages are not saved unless one of the users chooses to do so. In Mr. Onesko’s case, he said, the alleged victims saved only a portion of the conversations — and sometimes days or weeks were missing.

In the beginning of the conversation with one boy in early January, the attorney continued, when Mr. Onesko was still purporting to be the teenage girl, he chatted about golf. Over time, though, the messages from at least one of the boys changed. The boy repeatedly asked for “alainabp5” to send a photo of herself. Mr. Onesko refused.

The boy repeatedly questioned if the person on the other side of the chat was a pedophile and asked for proof of identity. Eventually, Mr.Onesko revealed himself as “Coach O,” a 26-year-old man, who used to coach at South Fayette.

“[They] were willing participants, I submit, in a game with Mr. Onesko,” Mr. Misko said of the alleged victims.

Mr. Misko tried to brush away the sexual comments, saying in his closing that there was no context to the question Mr. Onesko asked about the size of one boy’s penis, or to his offering oral sex to the other victim.

“Saying something inappropriate or distasteful does not always constitute a crime,” Mr. Misko said.

But in his closing, Mr. Gleixner said Mr. Onesko’s behavior was criminal.

Mr. Gleixner questioned why, if Mr. Onesko was so uncomfortable that the boys were harassing him, he continued to chat with them.

“Why keep going on with this ...? Patrick Onesko was grooming these two boys, and it’s a process,” the prosecutor said. “Patrick Onesko is an online predator who preyed upon these two boys.”