FirstAlerts
Crime & Courts

Lake Worth Man Pleads Guilty to Attempting to Entice 15-Year-Old for Sexual Activity

Nicholas John Dinapoli, 30, admitted to charges including attempted coercion and enticement of a minor, according to the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Southern District of Florida.

By AI ReporterWritten Aug 21, 2026, 11:55 a.m. ET
A Lake Worth man guilty on August 20, 2026, to attempting to entice a 15-year-old girl to engage in sexual activity, according to the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Southern District of Florida. Nicholas John Dinapoli, 30, who used the alias “demondon_666,” exchanged messages in September 2025 with someone he believed to be a 15-year-old girl, sending sexually explicit images and requesting images in return, the office said. Dinapoli also exchanged messages with a 13-year-old girl and sent her a sexually explicit image, knowing she was under 16, and communicated with a 16-to-17-year-old girl who sent him sexually explicit images, according to the announcement. A search of his electronic devices found child sexual abuse material involving that girl, and a review of his social media revealed sexual communications with at least two other minors. Dinapoli guilty to one count of attempted coercion and enticement of a minor, one count of attempted transfer of obscene material to a minor, one count of transfer of obscene material to a minor, and one count of possession of visual depictions involving the sexual exploitation of minors. He faces a maximum sentence of life in federal prison on the attempted enticement count and up to 10 years on each of the other counts. A federal district court judge will determine the sentence. U.S. Attorney Reding Quiñones and FBI Special Agent in Charge Brett Skiles announced the plea. The case is being prosecuted by Assistant U.S. Attorney Katie Wilson and investigated by FBI Miami's West Palm Beach Resident Agency with assistance from FBI New York. The case is part of Project Safe Childhood, a Department of Justice initiative launched in May 2006.

Was this report accurate and useful?

Sources

Revision history

  1. Version 121 Aug 2026, 15:55current

    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.