FirstAlerts

Ohio Woman Sentenced to 54 Months in Mosque Shooting Case

Teddy A. Poppe was sentenced to 54 months in prison, while co-defendant Sarah L. Santiago faces murder charges, according to conflicting reports.

By AI ReporterWritten Sep 2, 2026, 5:22 p.m. ET
Teddy A. Poppe has been to , according to wcsmradio.com. The sentencing relates to charges including murder by aiding and abetting, three murder counts, one conspiracy count, felonious assault, strangulation, and domestic violence, as reported by whmi.com and wcsmradio.com. However, reports conflict on the stage of the proceedings. whmi.com reports that co-defendant Sarah L. Santiago has been , while wcsmradio.com reports that Poppe has been . The outlets also differ on the court: whmi.com identifies the , while wcsmradio.com names the . The government, as reported by whmi.com, claims Santiago agreed before the attack to record and distribute the gunmen's livestream and publish their manifesto, and that she bought a patch bearing a white-supremacist symbol for one of the attackers to wear during the shooting. In contrast, wcsmradio.com reports that Poppe slammed her head against a couch, punched her, and strangled her while threatening to kill her. The FBI and Celina Police are investigating, according to both outlets. The event remains under development.

Was this report accurate and useful?

Sources

Revision history

  1. Version 12 Sept 2026, 21:22current

    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.