AI Risk Wire

Cases › produced harmful content › LR-2026-0369

Bethlehem man sentenced under new law banning AI child sexual abuse material

Preliminary Why: Publisher not yet named · subject to change

Status: no action reported

Severity moderate
Reported 17 Dec 2025

No source states: loss or records, developer and model, agent tool, could do, deployer, industry.

Severity moderate: test: data of others (photos of children) was touched and the scope is bounded, with three altered images saved

A Bethlehem, Pennsylvania man, Adam Erdman, was sentenced under Act 125 of 2024, a law that makes possession of AI-generated child sexual abuse material a crime. Erdman downloaded photos of children from a parent’s social media account and used AI photo-editing software to make the children appear nude, saving three altered images on his computer. His estranged wife found the images and contacted police. He pleaded guilty to one count of possession and was sentenced to 28 months to 10 years in state prison, and he must register as a sex offender for 15 years. Prosecutors said the case showed why the law was needed.

What happened

1 · What it was doingThe man downloaded photos of children from a parent's social media account and used AI photo-editing software to make the children appear nude.
2 · What went wrongHe saved three altered images on his computer.
3 · What it reached or didHis estranged wife discovered the images.
4 · How it was caughtThe wife contacted police on March 31.

What was done

No source states an action or fix.

Risks

Privacy harm to a person
Primary41 incidents

Read from the sources; not yet reviewed by a person.

Controls

Not yet read for controls. Controls that mitigate the primary risk:

Application

Data minimisation · Sensitive-data checks on outbound data · Human approval for high-impact actions · Output filtering and redaction · People told they are dealing with AI · Risk assessment per deployment

Infrastructure / target

Bot and scraping defences

Evidence

No source states: when it happened, how many records were exposed, the direct loss, a count of the other parties affected, any court case, the cause, what was done.

Show the full account: 3 items from the primary sources

What happened, in order

  1. March 31 Erdman's estranged wife discovers the images and contacts police.
  2. April 17 Erdman is charged.

Not dated in the sources:

  • Erdman is sentenced to 28 months to 10 years in state prison and must register as a sex offender for 15 years.
Show every field, with its source and grade

What happened

Earliest source we hold
2025-12-17
D inferred by us from the described behaviour, reason shown
What set it off
misused by a person
C one secondary source states it
Who caught it
an outside party
C one secondary source states it
What went wrong
produced harmful content
D inferred by us from the described behaviour, reason shown
primary risk
RK15
D inferred by us from the described behaviour, reason shown

Impact

Severity
moderate
D inferred by us from the described behaviour, reason shown
Who was affected
Children whose photos were taken from a parent’s social media account
C one secondary source states it
Kinds of data exposed
photographs of children
C one secondary source states it
Why this severity
test: data of others (photos of children) was touched and the scope is bounded, with three altered images saved
D inferred by us from the described behaviour, reason shown

Context

Country
United States
C one secondary source states it

Notes on gaps

The year of the discovery (March 31) and charge (April 17) dates is not stated, so no full dates are given. The date of occurrence is not stated. The number of children and images beyond three is not stated, so no counts are given.

LR-2026-0369 · version 1 · published 2026-11-01 after automatic checks; not yet checked field by field by a person · JSON