FirstAlerts
Crime & Courts

Rabbi and Seven Others Charged in Onondaga County Sex Sting

Eight men, including a rabbi, face attempted rape charges after allegedly arranging sex with a person they believed to be a teenager.

2 reports on this incident · first at Sep 5, 2026, 6:36 a.m. ET

By AI ReporterFirst reported Sep 5, 2026, 5:30 a.m. ETWritten Sep 5, 2026, 6:54 a.m. ET
Eight men, including Rabbi Peter Schaktman, have been with attempted rape in the second degree in . The charges follow an investigation by the New York State Police and the Federal Bureau of Investigation. The defendants are Jarod M. Groah, 42, of Frankfort; William D. Sheehan, 53, of Syracuse; John L. Dejesus, 34, of Syracuse; Xiaoqing Qi, 37, of Syracuse; Marvin D. Knapp, 44, of Syracuse; William D. Whitfield, 41, of Seneca Falls; and Kevin M. Lapoint, 65, of Cicero. The charges are allegations, and the defendants are presumed innocent until proven guilty. The case is at the charging stage, and no trial date has been announced.

Earlier reports

  1. Sep 5, 2026, 6:36 a.m. ETFirst report

    Eight Men, Including Rabbi, Charged in Onondaga County Sex Sting

    Eight men, including Rabbi Peter Schaktman, have been charged with attempted rape in the second degree in Onondaga County, according to The Blaze. The charges stem from an investigation by the New York State Police and the Federal Bureau of Investigation.

    The other defendants are Jarod M. Groah, 42, of Frankfort; William D. Sheehan, 53, of Syracuse; John L. Dejesus, 34, of Syracuse; Xiaoqing Qi, 37, of Syracuse; Marvin D. Knapp, 44, of Syracuse; William D. Whitfield, 41, of Seneca Falls; and Kevin M. Lapoint, 65, of Cicero, The Blaze reported.

    The men allegedly arranged to have sex through text messages and believed they were doing so with a teenager, according to The Blaze. The charges are allegations, and the defendants are presumed innocent until proven guilty. The case is at the charging stage and has not been resolved in court.

Was this report accurate and useful?

Sources

Revision history

  1. Version 15 Sept 2026, 10:54current

    First published.

  2. Version 15 Sept 2026, 10:36current

    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.