Richmond Man Sentenced to 10 Years for Distributing Child Sexual Abuse Material

A Richmond man was sentenced on September 3, 2026, to 10 years in prison for distributing child sexual abuse material, according to federal prosecutors.

3 reports on this incident · first at Sep 4, 2026, 4:50 p.m. ET

By AI ReporterWritten Sep 4, 2026, 7:52 p.m. ET

A Richmond man was on September 3, 2026, to 10 years in prison for distribution of child sexual abuse material (CSAM), the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Eastern District of Virginia announced on September 4, 2026. According to court documents, on May 22, 2025, Randon Alexander Sprinkle, 31, used a dating app to contact another user who purportedly was the father of a nine-year-old son, but in actuality was an undercover agent with the FBI Child Exploitation and Human Trafficking Task Force. Sprinkle immediately invited the user to communicate via the Telegram app. After alluding to a sexual interest in minors, Sprinkle sent a video depicting two adults . Sprinkle then expressed his interest in travelling to Washington, D.C., to meet the other user and sexually abuse his purported nine-year-old son. On Oct. 16, 2025, FBI agents searched Sprinkle’s residence in Richmond and seized two laptop computers and a cellphone. Sprinkle’s cellphone contained 43 CSAM files and one of the laptops contained two additional files. The files included depictions of the abuse of toddler-aged children. Theophani K. Stamos, First Assistant U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia, and Ian Kaufmann, Special Agent in Charge of the FBI’s Richmond Field Office, made the announcement after sentencing by U.S. District Judge Roderick C. Young. Assistant U.S. Attorneys Ellen Hubbard Theisen and Janet Jin Ah Lee prosecuted the case. This case was brought as part of Project Safe Childhood, a nationwide initiative launched in May 2006 by the Department of Justice to combat the growing epidemic of child sexual exploitation and abuse.

Earlier reports

Sep 4, 2026, 4:52 p.m. ET
Richmond man sentenced to 10 years for distributing child sexual abuse material
A Richmond man was sentenced on Sept. 3, 2026, to 10 years in prison for distribution of child sexual abuse material (CSAM), according to the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Eastern District of Virginia.
Randon Alexander Sprinkle, 31, was sentenced by U.S. District Judge Roderick C. Young. Court documents state that on May 22, 2025, Sprinkle used a dating app to contact a user who purported to be the father of a nine-year-old boy but was actually an undercover FBI agent. Sprinkle moved the conversation to Telegram, sent a video depicting adults abusing a minor, and expressed interest in traveling to Washington, D.C., to sexually abuse the purported child.
On Oct. 16, 2025, FBI agents searched Sprinkle's residence and seized two laptops and a cellphone. The devices contained 43 CSAM files on the cellphone and two additional files on one laptop, including depictions of toddler abuse. 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. The case was prosecuted under Project Safe Childhood.
Sep 4, 2026, 4:50 p.m. ETFirst report
Richmond man sentenced to 10 years for distributing child sexual abuse material
A Richmond man was sentenced on September 3, 2026, to 10 years in prison for distribution of child sexual abuse material (CSAM), according to the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Eastern District of Virginia.
Court documents state that on May 22, 2025, Randon Alexander Sprinkle, 31, used a dating app to contact an undercover FBI agent posing as the father of a nine-year-old boy. Sprinkle moved the conversation to Telegram, sent a video depicting adults abusing a minor, and expressed interest in traveling to Washington, D.C., to sexually abuse the purported child.
On October 16, 2025, FBI agents searched Sprinkle's residence and seized two laptops and a cellphone. According to the announcement by First Assistant U.S. Attorney Theophani K. Stamos and FBI Special Agent in Charge Ian Kaufmann, Sprinkle's cellphone contained 43 CSAM files and one of the laptops contained two additional files, including depictions of toddler abuse. U.S. District Judge Roderick C. Young imposed the sentence. The case was prosecuted under Project Safe Childhood, a Department of Justice initiative.

Was this report accurate and useful?

Sources

Revision history

Version 14 Sept 2026, 20:52current
First published.
Version 14 Sept 2026, 20:50current
First published.
Version 14 Sept 2026, 23:52current
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.

Earlier reports