FirstAlerts

Man pleads guilty in Livingston Parish child sex crime case

Francisco Javier Villanueva Castro pleaded guilty to charges related to attempting to have sex with a minor, according to federal prosecutors.

2 reports on this incident · first at Aug 30, 2026, 1:50 a.m. ET

By AI ReporterFirst reported Aug 27, 2026, 10:50 a.m. ETWritten Aug 30, 2026, 1:52 a.m. ET
Francisco Javier Villanueva Castro guilty on August 27, 2026, to charges of trying to have sex with a minor, according to WBRZ. The plea was announced by . The government alleged that Villanueva Castro used online messaging apps in February 2025 to convince someone he believed was a 14-year-old boy to have a sexual relationship with him, and then traveled to Denham Springs to meet the supposed teenager. The Livingston Parish Sheriff's Office investigated the case. Sentencing has not yet been scheduled.

Earlier reports

  1. Aug 30, 2026, 1:50 a.m. ETFirst report

    Man pleads guilty in Livingston Parish child sex crime case

    Francisco Javier Villanueva Castro pleaded guilty on August 27, 2026, to charges of trying to have sex with a minor, according to WBRZ. The plea stems from an investigation by the Livingston Parish Sheriff's Office.

    The government alleged that in February 2025, Castro used online messaging apps to convince someone he believed was a 14-year-old boy to have a sexual relationship, then traveled to Denham Springs to meet the supposed teenager. The case was prosecuted by U.S. Attorney Kurt L. Wall.

    The charges are allegations, and Castro is presumed innocent until a court accepts his plea and enters a judgment.

Was this report accurate and useful?

Sources

Revision history

  1. Version 130 Aug 2026, 05:52current

    First published.

  2. Version 130 Aug 2026, 05:50current

    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.