Authorities in Sandy say a local tech executive at an artificial intelligence company is at the center of a disturbing deepfake case that could help define how Utah and other states handle synthetic child sexual abuse material.
Burke Clark Powers, 48, the co‑founder and chief technology officer of a Salt Lake County AI firm, was arrested in Sandy on Wednesday after investigators reported finding AI‑generated deepfake images and videos that appeared to depict children. Police booked Powers on an investigation involving multiple counts tied to sexual exploitation of a minor, a development that has unsettled some in the local tech and legal communities as they watch how quickly generative AI can be twisted for abuse.
According to KSL, the investigation began when Powers' ex‑wife discovered folders of AI‑generated child sexual abuse material and pornography on his computer and in a Google Drive account. She reported the discovery to the FBI National Threat Operations Center. Investigators say they obtained a search warrant for the Google Drive and recovered what a police booking affidavit described as "a large quantity of AI-generated images and videos, including adult pornography and child sex abuse material."
Police booked Powers on an investigation of 10 counts of sexual exploitation of a minor. Investigators say he acknowledged using faces from past friends to create the deepfakes. The affidavit also describes images and videos in which Powers' face was swapped onto male bodies and other victims' faces were used to create AI pornography of him. Powers told detectives that some childlike images were generated "by accident multiple times," according to KSL.
Charges, Law and Penalties
Utah updated its sexual exploitation statute this spring to explicitly cover AI‑generated material in its definition of child sexual abuse material. Under Utah Code Section 76‑5b‑103, "apparent child sexual abuse material" includes images created with generative AI. Producing, possessing, or distributing such material can carry felony exposure.
Prosecutors around the country have argued in recent cases that obscene AI‑generated depictions of children are not protected speech and can be pursued under existing child‑exploitation laws, even when the material is synthetic rather than drawn from real‑world abuse.
A Growing National Pattern
Federal and state authorities have increasingly treated AI‑generated child sexual abuse material the same way they treat traditional CSAM. The Department of Justice documented a February conviction that included AI‑generated child sexual abuse material and emphasized that prosecutors will pursue offenses involving generative AI.
Separately, the New Mexico Department of Justice this year announced an arrest in which the defendant was accused of using AI apps to convert otherwise innocuous photos of children into explicit images. Taken together, such cases have pushed investigators and attorneys general to demand stronger safeguards on platforms and clearer reporting channels when AI tools are misused for exploitation.
What Comes Next
Authorities say the investigation involving Powers is ongoing, with detectives reviewing digital evidence and service records. Formal charging decisions and court dates had not yet been made public as of the latest reports.
If prosecutors move forward with charges, the case is expected to test how state and potentially federal officials apply both new and long‑standing statutes to AI‑generated imagery. Victim‑advocacy groups and tech policy experts say cases like this one are likely to increase pressure on platforms and AI toolmakers to build more effective safeguards that limit the creation and spread of nonconsensual and exploitative content.
Local Fallout and Platform Pressure
The arrest lands at a moment when prosecutors and attorneys general nationwide are pressing social media platforms to crack down on the mass production of nonconsensual deepfakes. In January, a bipartisan coalition of 35 attorneys general urged X to stop its chatbot from producing sexually explicit images and to explain how it will remove illegal content and report users who generate it, according to the Office of the Attorney General, D.C.
Local officials and civil‑society groups say the Powers case underscores a blunt reality: without strong guardrails, generative AI tools can rapidly manufacture harmful material at scale, leaving law enforcement and regulators racing to keep up.
