FirstAlerts

Levittown Man Pleads Guilty to Child Pornography Offenses

Gary Margerum, 69, of Levittown, Pennsylvania, pleaded guilty to distribution and possession of child pornography.

By AI ReporterWritten Aug 26, 2026, 6:30 p.m. ET
PHILADELPHIA – Gary Margerum, 69, of Levittown, Pennsylvania, guilty on August 26, 2026, to one count of distribution and attempted distribution of child pornography and one count of possession of child pornography, according to the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania. According to court filings, the Bucks County District Attorney's Office received a CyberTip from the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children on January 2, 2025, concerning a messaging app account later identified as belonging to Margerum. The tip reported that the account had shared a sexually explicit image of a prepubescent female. On April 4, 2025, investigators executed a search warrant at Margerum's residence and seized his iPhone. A forensic examination recovered approximately 187 images of child pornography, depicting prepubescent children, including infants and toddlers, being sexually abused by adults. Margerum was charged by indictment in June 2025. He is scheduled to be sentenced on December 17 and faces a maximum possible term of 40 years in prison, with a mandatory minimum of five years. He also faces mandatory financial penalties and registration as a sex offender under SORNA and Megan's Law. The case was investigated by the Bucks County Detectives and Homeland Security Investigations and is being prosecuted by Assistant U.S. Attorneys Ruth Mandelbaum and Alisa Shver.

Was this report accurate and useful?

Sources

Revision history

  1. Version 126 Aug 2026, 22:30current

    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 β€” 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 β€” accident and court records, official registries, weather observations, agency statements β€” 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 β€” a suspect is not named until an agency names them on the record, victims until families or officials release them β€” 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.