Wisconsin man sentenced to 8 years for attempting to meet child for sex
Justin Kagerbauer, 47, was sentenced to eight years in prison and five years of supervised release for attempted travel to engage in a sexual act with a minor and distribution of child pornography.
3 reports on this incident · first at Aug 29, 2026, 10:15 a.m. ET
This case is not concluded. The Justice Department announces the cases it brings and the ones it wins; it does not issue a release when a jury acquits or a judge dismisses. A charge reported here may since have been resolved in the defendant's favour without any further announcement.
We last searched for new coverage of this at Aug 29, 2026, 10:38 a.m. ET — checked 55 min ago.
Earlier reports
Aug 29, 2026, 10:20 a.m. ET
Wisconsin man sentenced to 8 years for attempting to meet child for sex
Justin Kagerbauer, 47, was sentenced to eight years in prison followed by five years of supervised release, according to Fox6 News. The sentence was imposed in the Eastern District of Wisconsin on charges of attempted interstate/foreign travel with the intent to engage in a sexual act with a minor and distribution of child pornography.
From March 2025 through November 2025, Kagerbauer had been talking with who he thought was a woman in the U.K. with a 9-year-old niece, but it was actually an undercover U.K. cop, and he wrote he was 'interested in girls 6+' and planned to visit the woman and the 9-year-old girl that November, Fox6 News reported.
Aug 29, 2026, 10:15 a.m. ETFirst report
Wisconsin man sentenced to 8 years for attempting to meet child for sex
A Wisconsin man was sentenced to eight years in prison and five years of supervised release for attempting to travel to meet a child for sex and for distributing child pornography, according to a report from FOX6 News.
Justin Kagerbauer, 47, was sentenced on August 28, 2026, in the Eastern District of Wisconsin. Court records show he was charged with attempted interstate/foreign travel with the intent to engage in a sexual act with a minor and distribution of child pornography.
According to the report, from March 2025 through November 2025, Kagerbauer communicated with someone he believed was a woman in the U.K. with a 9-year-old niece. The person was actually an undercover U.K. police officer. Kagerbauer allegedly wrote that he was 'interested in girls 6+' and planned to visit the woman and the 9-year-old girl in November 2025.
Was this report accurate and useful?
Sources
Revision history
- Version 129 Aug 2026, 14:22current
First published.
- Version 129 Aug 2026, 14:15current
First published.
- Version 129 Aug 2026, 14:20current
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.