FirstAlerts
Crime & Courts

Gearhart Man Sentenced to 15 Years in Federal Prison for Child Exploitation

Joseph Biamont was sentenced in federal court on August 19, 2026, following a guilty plea to child sexual exploitation charges.

By AI ReporterWritten Aug 20, 2026, 11:15 a.m. ET
Developing · checked 17h ago

This case is not concluded. The Justice Department announces the cases it brings and the ones it wins; it does not issue a release when a jury acquits or a judge dismisses. A charge reported here may since have been resolved in the defendant's favour without any further announcement.

We last searched for new coverage of this at Aug 19, 2026, 7:14 p.m. ET — checked 17h ago.

According to court records from the U.S. Attorney's Office for the District of Oregon, 36-year-old Joseph Biamont of Gearhart, Oregon, was on August 19, 2026, to 15 years in federal prison and 10 years’ supervised release. Court documents state that Biamont surreptitiously recorded a minor victim for years, placing cameras in places where he could capture videos of the minor nude. Biamont possessed 71 videos of this victim depicting child sexual abuse material, as well as videos of other children. On May 6, 2025, a federal grand jury in Portland returned a 6-count indictment charging Biamont with five counts of sexual exploitation of children and one count of possession of child pornography. He was arrested on May 15, 2025, in Seaside, Oregon, and pled guilty on February 24, 2026. U.S. Attorney Scott E. Bradford stated, "This defendant violated the victim’s privacy and trust and stole the innocence of a child. My office is proud to bring these cases and hold Biamont, and criminals like him, accountable." The case was investigated by the Clatsop County Sheriff’s Office, the Gearhart Police Department, and the FBI, and prosecuted by Assistant U.S. Attorney Eliza Carmen Rodriguez in collaboration with Project Safe Childhood.

Was this report accurate and useful?

Sources

Revision history

  1. Version 120 Aug 2026, 15:15current

    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.