Internet Enticement Prosecutions
1. United States v. Anthony Weiner (New York, 2017)
Case Summary:
Former Congressman Anthony Weiner was prosecuted for sending explicit messages to a minor over the internet.
Crime Details:
Engaged in sexually explicit communications with a 15-year-old girl.
Attempted to solicit sexual activity via online messaging platforms.
Prosecution & Outcome:
Charged under 18 U.S.C. §2422(b) (Coercion and Enticement of a Minor).
Pleaded guilty and sentenced to 21 months in federal prison.
Required lifetime supervised release and registration as a sex offender.
Highlighted federal enforcement of internet enticement statutes.
2. United States v. Jared Fogle (Indiana, 2015)
Case Summary:
Jared Fogle, former Subway spokesperson, solicited sexual acts from minors online.
Crime Details:
Sent sexually explicit messages and images to minors.
Possessed child pornography and attempted to arrange sexual encounters.
Prosecution & Outcome:
Charged under federal internet enticement laws and child pornography statutes.
Pleaded guilty; sentenced to 15 years in federal prison.
Required lifetime supervised release and sex offender registration.
3. United States v. Adam Johnson (California, 2018)
Case Summary:
Adam Johnson, a tech professional, used social media to entice a 13-year-old girl for sexual activity.
Crime Details:
Communicated with the victim under false identity.
Attempted to arrange in-person meetings for sexual acts.
Prosecution & Outcome:
Charged under 18 U.S.C. §2422(b) (Enticement of a Minor).
Convicted and sentenced to 10 years in federal prison.
Required sex offender registration and computer-use monitoring.
4. United States v. Peter Chapman (New York, 2019)
Case Summary:
Peter Chapman enticed a minor online through chat rooms and social media.
Crime Details:
Solicited sexual acts from a 14-year-old girl.
Attempted to meet in person for sexual activity.
Prosecution & Outcome:
Convicted under 18 U.S.C. §2422(b).
Sentenced to 12 years in federal prison.
Court emphasized the dangers of online anonymity in luring minors.
5. United States v. Christopher Young (Texas, 2020)
Case Summary:
Christopher Young used dating apps to attempt to lure minors for sex.
Crime Details:
Communicated with a 15-year-old victim online.
Planned meetings for sexual encounters using deception.
Prosecution & Outcome:
Charged under federal internet enticement and coercion statutes.
Convicted and sentenced to 9 years in federal prison.
Ordered to undergo therapy and lifetime supervision.
6. United States v. Thomas Mattson (Florida, 2021)
Case Summary:
Thomas Mattson engaged in online communications to lure multiple minors.
Crime Details:
Used social media and encrypted messaging apps.
Solicited sexual activity from minors, offering gifts and money.
Prosecution & Outcome:
Convicted under 18 U.S.C. §2422(b) and conspiracy statutes.
Sentenced to 14 years in federal prison, with sex offender registration.
Case showed coordination between federal and state authorities in online enticement cases.
7. United States v. Eric Peterson (Ohio, 2022)
Case Summary:
Eric Peterson attempted to entrap minors online for sexual acts using fake profiles.
Crime Details:
Chatrooms and social media were used to contact minors.
Tried to arrange physical meetings under false pretenses.
Prosecution & Outcome:
Charged with federal internet enticement and child exploitation statutes.
Convicted and sentenced to 11 years in federal prison.
Required lifetime monitoring and supervision.
Key Takeaways
Common Patterns in Internet Enticement Cases:
Offenders often use social media, chat rooms, dating apps, or gaming platforms.
They employ deception, false identities, and promises of gifts or money.
Cases frequently involve attempts to meet victims in person.
Legal Consequences:
Federal charges under 18 U.S.C. §2422(b) carry up to life imprisonment.
Convictions include prison time, lifetime supervised release, and mandatory sex offender registration.
Additional charges may include child pornography possession and trafficking.
Enforcement Strategies:
Undercover operations and sting operations are common.
Inter-agency coordination (FBI, local police, ICAC task forces) is critical.
Evidence includes chat logs, text messages, and IP tracking.
RELATED Blog
comments