A Bethlehem man is among the first to be sentenced under a Pennsylvania law passed last year, making it a crime to possess AI-generated child sex abuse material.

On Monday, Lehigh County Court of Common Pleas Judge Kristie M. Marks sentenced 35-year-old Adam Erdman to two years, four months to 10 years.

Erdman in September pleaded guilty to felony possessing child sex abuse material. He faced a possible sentence of 5 to 10 years in prison.

Lehigh County District Attorney Gavin Holihan announced the sentencing in a news conference Monday afternoon. The DA credited U.S. Rep. Ryan Mackenzie, who introduced the new legislation and state Sen. Tracy Pennycuick, who championed the final version of the law last year.

“Before this law was passed, the use of AI to generate child sexual abuse materials went unpunished,” Holihan said. “Prosecutors like me need legislation like this to arrest and convict the criminals who use evolving technology to victimize others.”

Macungie-based attorney Michael Ira Stump, representing Erdman, couldn’t immediately be reached for comment Tuesday morning.

Bethlehem police on March 31 were called by Erdman’s estranged wife, who reported finding three AI-generated nude images of juvenile girls on his personal computer.

Prosecutors said Erdman downloaded photos of the children on vacation from their parent’s social media account, and then used artificial intelligence photo-editing software to make the children appear naked.

Erdman was charged on April 17.

The case was investigated by Bethlehem Police Det. Stephen Ewald and was prosecuted by Lehigh County Senior Deputy District Attorney Sarah K. Heimbach.

PENNSYLVANIA (WTAJ) — Over $17 million has been awarded to county teams across the Commonwealth for projects in reducing nutrient and sediment pollution in the Chesapeake Bay Watershed.

Grants were awarded to counties with projects taking place over the next 12 to 24 months. Many different human activities cause nutrient pollution and eroded sediment to enter streams, rivers, and lakes. This pollution can come from fertilizer, plowing and tilling farm fields and can cause stripping away of trees and vegetation, and increasing paved surfaces. 

Here are the grants awarded in our area:

• Blair County Conservation District: $308,095
• Cambria County Conservation District: $200,000
• Centre County Government: $566,399
• Clearfield County Conservation District: $368,209
• Huntingdon County Conservation District: $409,134

“Pennsylvania’s clean water successes are rooted in collaboration—state, local, federal, legislative, and non-governmental partners, and of course landowners,” Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) Secretary Jessica Shirley said. “The work will continue to evolve, and our focus will remain on setting our collaborative partnerships up for success well beyond 2025. The momentum is real, and you can see it in our improved water quality.”

In total, 222 projects were approved, and it’s estimated to reduce nitrogen by 113,493 pounds/year, phosphorus by 28,816 pounds/year, and sediment delivered to the Chesapeake Bay by 1.8 million pounds/year.

The case against a complete ban

There’s limited research available to date regarding the efficacy of school cellphone bans. Some studies, like one from 2024 at Auburn University, suggest such a policy could improve student engagement and social interactions with some limitations.

However, researchers at the University of Birmingham could not find much of a difference in academic and social outcomes between students who attended schools with cellphone bans and those who attended schools that did not.

School District of Philadelphia Superintendent Dr. Tony Watlington said in an interview with Philadelphia Magazine in August that he believes the decision is best made by each school.

“There are parents who feel very strongly that they need to be able to reach their children at all times, and there are others who feel the complete opposite,” Watlington told the magazine. “Cellphones can certainly be a distraction, but they can also be a walking library in the classroom.”

Some parents critical of legislative-level cellphone bans also highlight the need to reach their children in an era of school shootings and mass violence.

Santarsiero argued that cellphones, in those instances, may do more harm than good. Some school safety experts might agree.

Santarsiero recalled a time when he was a teacher where an armed robbery several blocks away prompted a lockdown at the school. Unaware of the robbery, he locked the classroom door, gathered his students to the corner of the room, away from the windows, and waited for instructions.

“We did that, and for the next hour and a half, before the incident was resolved, the kids started going on their phones, and they were texting home and really spreading a lot of rumors that turned out not to be true: that there was an armed shooter roaming the halls, that we were in imminent danger. And this was now filtering out to parents,” he said. “It was filtering out to other students, and it was creating a level of anxiety that was not helpful to trying to manage the situation.”

Pennsylvania School Boards Association, or PSBA, opposes Senate Bill 1014.

“While PSBA supports the goal of fostering learning-focused environments, the proposed legislation imposes a statewide, mandatory bell-to-bell ban on student cell phone use—stripping locally elected school boards of the ability to make decisions that best serve their communities,” the association wrote in a statement. “PSBA believes that locally elected school directors are in the best position to make decisions for their school communities concerning the use and possession of cell phones and other electronic devices in schools.”

According to PSBA, the bill “usurps local control.”

“PSBA also has some concerns with the wording of SB 1014, specifically the language regarding restriction of device possession and with the language regarding public comment,” PSBA wrote. “The bill would require schools to establish the manner in which a student’s possession of a device is to be restricted. It is unclear whether this language would require schools to take some sort of action to separate a student from their phone at the start of each school day (such as by purchasing and using lockable cell phone bags).”

Hughes said that officials must acknowledge the “good” that comes with the advancements in communication technology. However, he said the harm cannot be ignored.

“We need to have thoughtful conversations to come up with thoughtful policies that advantages the best of this technology, and minimizes the pain and the hurt that the technology can have on people — especially our children,” Hughes said.

The Senate is scheduled to return to session in January.