PROVIDENCE, RI – A federal grand jury in Providence today returned a three-count indictment charging Cody J. Hansen, 34, of Orange, MA, with attempted enticement of a minor, attempted transfer of obscene material to a minor, and travel with the intent to engage in illicit sexual conduct, announced by United States Attorney Stephen G. Dambruch, Rhode Island State Police Superintendent Colonel Ann C. Assumpico, and Homeland Security Investigations Special Agent in Charge Peter C. Fitzhugh.
Hansen was arrested on May 22, 2018, by members of the Rhode Island State Police Internet Crimes Against Children (ICAC) Task Force when he arrived at a designated location where it is alleged he believed he would meet with a person who would assist him in meeting with and have sexual contact with a 12-year-old and an 8-year-old girl.
He was ordered detained by U.S. District Court Magistrate Judge Patricia A. Sullivan.
According to court documents, it is alleged that on April 20, 2018, a Rhode Island State Police trooper assigned to the ICAC Task Force responded to an online classified advertisement of an individual seeking to engage in illicit sexual activity. The trooper responded in an undercover capacity, first posing as the boyfriend of a woman with two minor children, age 8 and 12, then as the 12-year-old girl. It is alleged that the conversation turned sexually explicit, and, during one of many email exchanges over the next month, Hansen allegedly sent a sexually explicit picture to the person he thought to be the 12-year-old girl. During the communications, the trooper and Hansen arranged to meet in Rhode Island.
According to court documents, on May 22, Hanson arrived at a designated location, entered the state police trooper’s undercover vehicle, and discussed with the trooper his intent to have sexual contact with the 12 and 8-year-old girls. On the trooper’s signal, members of the ICAC Task Force surrounded the vehicle and took Hansen into custody.
An arraignment date on the indictment has not yet been scheduled. An indictment is merely an allegation and is not evidence of guilt. A defendant is entitled to a fair trial in which it will be the government’s burden to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.