Columbus Man Sentenced to 15 Years for Cyberstalking and AI-Generated Child Sexual Abuse Material
James Strahler II received a 180-month federal prison sentence for cyberstalking and creating AI-generated obscene content involving adults and children.
3 reports on this incident · first at Sep 8, 2026, 3:52 p.m. ET
Earlier reports
Sep 8, 2026, 10:22 p.m. ET
Columbus man sentenced to 15 years for AI-fueled cyberstalking and child sexual abuse material
James Strahler II, 37, of Columbus, was sentenced on September 8, 2026, to 15 years in federal prison for a campaign of cyberstalking and creation of AI-generated sexual abuse material, according to the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Southern District of Ohio.
Strahler pleaded guilty in April to cyberstalking, producing obscene visual representations of child sexual abuse, and publication of digital forgeries. The latter charge is part of the Take It Down Act, a 2025 law prohibiting non-consensual online publication of intimate images and AI forgeries. U.S. Attorney Dominick S. Gerace II called it "the first in the Nation under the Take It Down Act."
From December 2024 to June 2025, Strahler used more than 24 AI platforms and 100 AI models to harass at least six adult women, according to the U.S. Attorney's Office. He sent nude images, created pornographic videos of a victim with her father and distributed them to her co-workers, threatened victims' mothers, and posted AI-generated obscene images of children online. He created more than 700 images and posted them to a website dedicated to child sexual abuse; an additional 2,400 images and videos on his phone were flagged as depicting nudity, morphed child sexual abuse material, or violence.
The case was investigated by the FBI, Hilliard Police Department, and Delaware County Sheriff's Office, and was announced by U.S. Attorney Gerace, FBI Cincinnati Special Agent in Charge Jason Cromartie, Hilliard Police Chief Mike Woods, and officials with the Maryland AI and Synthetic Media Threats Task Force. Chief U.S. District Court Judge Sarah D. Morrison imposed the sentence.
Sep 8, 2026, 3:52 p.m. ETFirst report
Columbus Man Sentenced to 15 Years for Cyberstalking and AI-Generated Child Sexual Abuse Material
James Strahler II, 37, of Columbus, was sentenced on September 8, 2026, in U.S. District Court to 180 months in prison for cybercrimes involving real and AI-generated sexually explicit images and threats of violence, according to the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Southern District of Ohio.
Strahler pleaded guilty in April to cyberstalking, producing obscene visual representations of child sexual abuse, and publication of digital forgeries. His conviction for publication of digital forgeries is the first in the nation under the Take It Down Act, a 2025 law prohibiting non-consensual online publication of intimate images and AI forgeries.
From December 2024 to June 2025, Strahler harassed at least six adult women, sending nude images and AI-generated pornographic videos, including one depicting a victim with her father, which he distributed to her co-workers. He also threatened victims' mothers and created AI-generated obscene content of minor boys, posting over 700 images to a website dedicated to child sexual abuse. An additional 2,400 images and videos on his phone were flagged as depicting nudity, morphed child sexual abuse material, or violence.
U.S. Attorney Dominick S. Gerace II said, "I'm proud of my Office's prosecution of this case—the first in the Nation under the Take It Down Act." FBI Cincinnati Special Agent in Charge Jason Cromartie and Hilliard Police Chief Mike Woods also commented on the case. The investigation was first reported to the Hilliard Police Department and Delaware County Sheriff's Office before being referred to the FBI. Strahler was arrested in June 2025.
Was this report accurate and useful?
Sources
Revision history
- Version 19 Sept 2026, 02:52current
First published.
- Version 18 Sept 2026, 19:52current
First published.
- Version 19 Sept 2026, 02:22current
First published.
How we work
This site models an investigative reporter rather than a wire desk. The aim is the most complete, accurate and timely account we can assemble — all three, not a trade between them. Reports go out within minutes of the coverage they are built from, carrying context a newsroom would otherwise need a day and a records request to gather: what has happened at this place before, what the operator’s record is, which aircraft it actually was.
Reports are built from primary sources — accident and court records, official registries, weather observations, agency statements — and from reputable news organisations, each named where their reporting is used. Facts are extracted before anything is written, and every one must be supported by a quotation found in the source itself; the model that writes the report is given only those verified facts and never sees the article, so it cannot introduce a detail no source stated.
Where sources disagree we publish the disagreement, attributed, rather than picking a figure. Where a fact comes from a record rather than a reporter, we say so, and the language matches: an instrument reading is never described as something anyone confirmed. Some things are deliberately withheld — a suspect is not named until an agency names them on the record, victims until families or officials release them — and corrections appear as visible revisions, never as silent edits.
None of that makes a report true. A quotation check proves a source said something, not that it was right, and an automated system can be confidently wrong in ways the checks do not catch. If something here is wrong, the feedback above is how it gets found. The full methodology, including what we refuse to publish.