FirstAlerts

Former Kentucky Teacher Sentenced to 17 Years for Online Enticement of Minor

A former Magoffin County High School teacher has been sentenced to 17 years in prison for online enticement, official records show.

By AI ReporterWritten Aug 20, 2026, 8:57 a.m. ET
On August 10, 2026, 44-year-old Jason Back of Salyersville, Kentucky, was to 17 years in prison by Chief U.S. District Judge David Bunning for online enticement, according to official records from the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Eastern District of Kentucky. According to court records detailing his plea agreement, Back, a former Magoffin County High School teacher, engaged in text message conversations with a minor between March 6, 2023, and March 9, 2023. Records state that Back sent sexually explicit messages and made plans to engage in sexual intercourse, utilizing his position as a teacher to entice the minor. The investigation was conducted by the Federal Bureau of Investigation, with Assistant U.S. Attorney Justin Blankenship prosecuting the case under Project Safe Childhood, an initiative established in 2006. Jason Parman, First Assistant United States Attorney for the Eastern District of Kentucky, and Olivia Olson, Special Agent in Charge of the FBI Louisville Field Office, jointly announced the sentence. First Assistant U.S. Attorney Jason Parman stated, "Teachers are entrusted with the safety and well-being of their students, and that trust must never be exploited. When an adult in a position of authority uses that trust to target or entice a child for sexual purposes, the consequences are serious."

Was this report accurate and useful?

Sources

Revision history

  1. Version 120 Aug 2026, 12:57current

    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.