Following an undercover internet sting, the accused was tried on multiple child luring counts and one count of making sexually explicit material available to a child.
The court rejected the accused's evidence that he believed he was engaged in role-playing with an adult and found his explanation about chatting to impress co-workers not credible.
Applying the statutory presumptions and the Supreme Court's framework for internet luring, the court held the accused believed he was communicating with a 14-year-old, took no reasonable steps to ascertain age, and used sexualized communications, requests for images, and pornography links to groom and lower the child's inhibitions.
Convictions were entered on all counts.
