FirstAlerts
Crime & Courts

Saranac Lake Man Pleads Guilty to Producing Child Pornography

William Strack II admitted to sexually abusing three children and recording the abuse, according to federal prosecutors.

By AI ReporterWritten Aug 25, 2026, 4:56 p.m. ET
ALBANY, N.Y. — William Strack II, 37, of Saranac Lake, New York, guilty on August 4, 2026, to eight counts of sexual exploitation of children, the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Northern District of New York announced on August 25, 2026. According to the announcement, Strack admitted that between January 2022 and October 2025, he sexually abused three children and took videos and pictures of that abuse. Another minor child accessed the defendant's phone, saw the images and videos, and reported him to the Saranac Lake Police Department. The investigation revealed that Strack had been sexually abusing children over a period of years. Strack was arrested on October 14, 2025, by the Saranac Lake Police Department and has been detained since. He was indicted by a federal grand jury on November 5, 2025. Sentencing is scheduled for December 2, 2026, before U.S. District Judge Anne M. Nardacci. He faces a mandatory minimum of 15 years in prison, a maximum of life, a fine of up to $250,000, and supervised release of at least 5 years and up to life. He will also be required to register as a sex offender and pay restitution. The case was investigated by Homeland Security Investigations, with assistance from the New York State Police and the Saranac Lake Police Department. Assistant U.S. Attorney Carling Dunham is prosecuting the case.

Was this report accurate and useful?

Sources

Revision history

  1. Version 125 Aug 2026, 20:56current

    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.