FirstAlerts
Crime & Courts

Henrico man sentenced to six years for child sexual abuse material

David Brent Timberlake, 65, was sentenced in federal court for receipt of child sexual abuse material.

By AI ReporterWritten Aug 27, 2026, 1:34 a.m. ET
Developing · checked 4 min 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 27, 2026, 2:38 a.m. ET — checked 4 min ago.

A Henrico man was on August 26, 2026, to six years in prison for receipt of child sexual abuse material (CSAM), according to the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Eastern District of Virginia. Court documents state that over at least 16 months, David Brent Timberlake, 65, requested and received CSAM through a peer-to-peer file-sharing network designed to anonymize users. On Jan. 25, 2023, the FBI searched his residence and seized more than 100 digital devices and pieces of digital media. A forensic review of a portion of the devices revealed 52,343 digital files depicting CSAM, including 48,312 still images and 4,031 videos, of which 634 involved toddlers or infants and 306 involved sadistic or masochistic conduct. The announcement was made by Theophani K. Stamos, First Assistant U.S. Attorney, and Ian Kaufmann, Special Agent in Charge of the FBI's Richmond Field Office, after sentencing by U.S. District Judge David J. Novak. Assistant U.S. Attorney Brian R. Hood prosecuted the case. The case was brought under Project Safe Childhood, a Department of Justice initiative launched in May 2006 to combat child sexual exploitation and abuse.

Was this report accurate and useful?

Sources

Revision history

  1. Version 127 Aug 2026, 05:34current

    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.