A second child with autism drowned in a Cincinnati pond in under a year. Now parents want answers
Parents are looking for answers after a second child with autism drowned in a Cincinnati pond in less than a year.
Six-year-old Joshua Al-Lateef drowned in a pond at his family's West Chester apartment complex in November. Months later, seven-year-old Mar'Dasia Forte drowned in a pond at her family's West Chester apartment complex on June 13.
The moms of both autistic children and the local advocacy group EmPath For Autism want their local lawmakers to do something about the drownings.
Governor Mike DeWine told The Enquirer the state government 'should look' at requiring fences around retention ponds. But Mar'Dasia's mom, Mika Forte, told the publication, 'I need more than looking.'
'We can't keep losing children like this,' she said.
The Enquirer reported, citing the National Autism Association, that a record number of at least 77 children with autism drowned last year. So far, at least 32 have drowned this year, according to the organization.
Mar'Dasia was a 'very happy, active, rambunctious little lady,' her mom said.
She had wandered away from home in the past, so Forte installed special locks on the door and got her daughter a bed she couldn't climb out of, but the little girl still managed to get out of the apartment.
"This should've stopped after the first [death],' Forte said, adding, "We have to do better."
Jonisa Cook, Joshua's mother, told The Enquirer she 'cried and cried' after hearing about Mar'Dasia's drowning.
Cook said Joshua was 'lovable and his smile was everything,' in a previous interview with The Enquirer.
Joshua had also wandered away from his home and drowned. He was found one day after he was reported missing, with hundreds of community members volunteering to search for him.
After Mar'Dasia's death, Cook said she's feeling more determined than ever to advocate for fences around retention ponds as well as an alert system for missing children with autism.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Independent
33 minutes ago
- The Independent
Man whose parents were kidnapped after $245M Bitcoin theft has pleaded guilty to federal charges
A Connecticut man whose parents were kidnapped after he took part in a $245 million Bitcoin theft has pleaded guilty to fraud and money laundering conspiracy charges and has agreed to testify against his co-defendants, according to court documents that were unsealed this week. Veer Chetal, 19, from Danbury, Connecticut, was one of three men charged with stealing 4,100 Bitcoins from a victim in Washington, D.C., in an elaborate online scam last August. The trio lived large after the heist, spending millions of dollars on cars, jewelry, rental mansions and nightclub parties, prosecutors say. A week after the theft, Chetal's parents were assaulted and kidnapped briefly in Danbury in a failed ransom plot aimed at Chetal, who the attackers believed had a large amount of cryptocurrency, authorities said. Chetal's criminal case was unsealed on Monday in federal court in Washington, revealing his guilty pleas in November and his agreement to cooperate with federal authorities investigating the Bitcoin theft. It also revealed new allegations that he was involved in about 50 similar thefts that raked in another $3 million between November 2023 and September 2024. Another man charged in the Bitcoin theft, Malone Lam, was also among 13 people indicted by a federal grand jury in May in an alleged online racketeering conspiracy involving cryptocurrency thefts across the U.S. and overseas that netted more than $260 million, including the $245 million Bitcoin theft. Chetal is facing 19 to 24 years in prison, a fine between $50,000 and $500,000 and restitution to the victim that has yet to be determined, according federal sentencing guidelines and his plea agreement. His lawyer, David Weinstein, declined to comment, saying Chetal's case is still pending. In September, federal agents with a search warrant raided Chetal's apartment in Brunswick, New Jersey, and his parents' home in Danbury in connection with the $245 million Bitcoin heist. Authorities said they found more than $500,000 in cash, expensive jewelry and watches and high-end clothing. Federal agents also said Chetal had $39 million worth of cryptocurrency that he turned over to investigators. Authorities alleged Chetal, Lam and Jeandiel Serrano were involved in online 'social engineering' attacks against cryptocurrency holders. Lam would send victims alerts about unauthorized attempts to access their crypto accounts, while the others would call the victims posing as representatives from well-known companies like Google and Yahoo and gain access to their accounts, authorities said. Messages seeking comment were left with lawyers for Lam and Serrano on Friday. A week after the theft, six Florida men were accused of kidnapping Chetal's parents in broad daylight in Danbury. One of them crashed a car into the parents' Lamborghini, while others pulled up in a van, police said. The attackers forced the couple out of their vehicle, beat them, put them in the van and tied them up, police said. The plot was foiled, and the attackers were arrested quickly because there were eyewitnesses who immediately called police, and an off-duty FBI agent happened to be driving by at the time of the kidnapping, authorities said. Federal agents said a seventh man who was later arrested in connection with the kidnapping had previously gotten into a dispute with Chetal that turned physical at a Miami nightclub. The attack on the couple is part of an increasing trend worldwide in robbers using violence to steal cryptocurrency. Chetal, who was attending Rutgers University in New Jersey at the time of the $245 million theft and later withdrew, was born in India and came to the U.S. with his family when he was 4 years old in 2010, according to court documents. His father was granted a foreign worker's visa, and his wife and children obtained related dependent visas. Federal authorities said Chetal could face deportation as a result of the criminal case. Authorities say Chetal's father lost his job at Morgan Stanley because of the kidnapping and his son's connection to it. Chetal was initially released from federal custody on his own recognizance. But a judge ordered him detained until trial earlier this year after federal prosecutors said they discovered Chetal was involved in another crypto theft worth $2 million in October that he didn't tell them about, after he had begun cooperating with federal authorities.
Reuters
33 minutes ago
- Reuters
Pro-Palestinian foreigners in US arrested by Trump administration and ordered to be released
WASHINGTON, June 20 (Reuters) - President Donald Trump's administration has faced judicial roadblocks while attempting to deport foreign pro-Palestinian students and protesters in the U.S., including on Friday when a judge ordered that Columbia University graduate Mahmoud Khalil be released from immigration custody. Trump has labeled the protesters as antisemitic and extremist sympathizers. Protesters, including some Jewish groups, say the government wrongly conflates their criticism of Israel's assault on Gaza with antisemitism and their advocacy for Palestinian rights with support for extremism. Here are some prominent pro-Palestinian foreigners in the U.S. who were arrested without being charged with a crime, and subsequently ordered to be released by a judge: A prominent figure at Columbia University's pro-Palestinian protests against Israel's war on Gaza, Khalil was arrested by immigration agents in the lobby of his Manhattan university residence on March 8. Khalil, a Palestinian born and raised in a refugee camp in Syria, is a U.S. legal permanent resident and says he was punished for his political speech in violation of the U.S. Constitution's First Amendment, which protects free speech rights. Khalil has previously condemned antisemitism and racism. His wife and son, who was born while Khalil was in prison, are U.S. citizens. In ordering Khalil's release on June 20, U.S. District Judge Michael Farbiarz said the government made no attempt to rebut evidence provided by Khalil's lawyers that he was not a flight risk nor a danger to the public. Columbia University student Mohsen Mahdawi was released from U.S. immigration custody on April 30. Mahdawi, born and raised in a refugee camp in the Israeli-occupied West Bank, was arrested earlier in April as he arrived for an interview for his U.S. citizenship petition. U.S. District Judge Geoffrey Crawford said Mahdawi did not pose a danger to the public and was not a flight risk. The judge drew parallels between the current U.S. political climate and the Red Scare and McCarthyism eras of the last century when thousands were targeted for deportation due to political views. Turkish Tufts University student Rumeysa Ozturk was released in early May after being held in an immigration detention center for over six weeks. Her lawyers said she was punished for co-authoring an opinion piece in a student newspaper that criticized the school's response to calls by students to divest from companies linked to Israel and to "acknowledge the Palestinian genocide." U.S. District Judge William Sessions said Ozturk, whose arrest video went viral, had raised a substantial claim that the sole reason she was being detained was "simply and purely the expression that she made or shared in the op-ed in violation of her First Amendment rights." A postdoctoral fellow at Georgetown University, Suri was released in mid-May, nearly two months after being taken into custody by federal immigration agents. Suri, who is from India and was on a U.S. student visa, is married to an American citizen who is from Gaza. Suri's lawyer denied the government's allegations that he supported Palestinian Islamist group Hamas.
Daily Mail
36 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
What comes next for Karen Read? Acquitted of murder and exalted to social media stardom... but not free from the courtroom just yet
Karen Read is not going to jail for the murder of her Boston cop boyfriend John O'Keefe, but she's far from out of the woods or out of the courtroom when it comes to the controversial case. Read 45, sobbed on Wednesday after being acquitted of murder for her police officer boyfriend in a retrial that has gripped and divided America. But the happy tears in the Massachusetts criminal courtroom merely closed a chapter on the ordeal rather than the whole book with Read still a long way from returning to a normal life. Now legal eagles and PR executives have weighed in on what comes next for the financial analyst. DUI Conviction While Read was cleared of the most serious charge stemming from the January 29, 2022 death she still faced some legal repercussions. The financial analyst was convicted on the lesser charge of drunk driving, which carries a maximum penalty of 2.5 years for a first offense. However, at sentencing she was handed one year of probation and ordered to take alcohol awareness classes. Probation for the offense in Massachusetts typically includes 30 hours of community service. The penalty is the standard one handed down to a first time offender. Many high-profile defendants walk away with book deals to give a first-person account of what really happened behind the scenes. Although it is unclear if Read has been offered one, or if she's even interested in one, it could continue to help her star rise after becoming a household name due to the trial. Netflix and HBO have already covered her trial in documentaries, leaving the window wide open for Read to join one. Criminal jurors have already started coming forward with their takes and opinions on the case and Read could very much do the same now that she can no longer face a murder charge for O'Keefe's death. However, if Read does choose to step into the spotlight further, any money she makes off the endeavors could be garnished if she loses her upcoming civil case with O'Keefe's family and has to pay damages. Civil Case Read's acquittal is far from the end of the grueling legal process and she is now facing another round in court. Read and her legal team are gearing up for a civil trial - a $50,000 wrongful death lawsuit filed by O'Keefe's family against her and two local bars. 'After a not-guilty verdict against Read, a civil case is all the family has left if they want to seek justice,' New Mexico-based lawyer, John W. Day, told 'The O'Keefe family will want this civil trial to move forward quickly while people are still talking about the verdict.' No date has been set for the trial yet, as it was put on pause while Read dealt with her criminal case. The case was filed against Read and two local bars - CF McCarthy's and Waterfall Bar and Grille - in August 2024 in the Plymouth Superior Court in Brockton and the family is seeking at least $50,000 in damages for O'Keefe's death. They argue Read engaged in reckless conduct that resulted in O'Keefe's death and that the bars, 'negligently served alcohol to an intoxicated person.' Many experts told Daily Mail that it would be beneficial for Read to push through the civil case as early as possible as her stronger-than-ever fanbase is ready to defend her. Tom Flaws, a Boston-based lawyer with the firm Altman Nussbaum Shunnarah, told Daily Mail that the O'Keefe family has a 'much lower bar to prove' that Read killed their son compared to the state in the criminal case. But that doesn't mean it will be an easy win for the heartbroken family, especially as Read's fanbase stays strong and criminal jurors continue to come out and cast doubt that the 45-year-old did it. 'That's a problem for the plaintiffs of the civil case,' Flaws said. Whereas, in a criminal trial, the State of Massachusetts had to prove Read performed a criminal act beyond a reasonable doubt. In the civil case, the O'Keefe family only has to prove that their version of events is plausible based on the preponderance of the evidence. If they can prove there is a more than a 50 percent chance of probability, they can win. 'It's a much lower burden,' Flaws, who has 20 years experience in the field, said. 'It's a bigger challenge for her [Read],' Florida-based lawyer, Emmanuel Galimidi, told Galimidi, who owns his own firm Galimidi Law, also believes the criminal jurors' opinions will influence her civil case. 'I don't see how they don't,' he said. 'That would influence me.' Considering how big the case became, Galimidi thinks there will be a good chance the local jurors picked for the civil trial will have at least heard of or be familiar with the case and will know the verdict of the criminal trial. 'Jury selection in very important,' the lawyer, who has 22 years of law experience and worked both on the plaintiffs and defendants' sides, said. 'In this one, it's much more important.' He also expects, regardless of the verdict, there will be an appeal made 'due to the nature of the case.' Tom Flaws, a Boston-based lawyer, told that the O'Keefe family has a 'much lower bar to prove' that Read killed their son compared to the state in the criminal case. Eric Schiffer said Read needs to rapidly change her reputation before entering another courtroom Obstacles The biggest difference - and perhaps an obstacle for Read - will be her deposition. Unlike her criminal case, she will have to take the stand and it will be the first time jurors and crime junkies alike will hear her side of the story directly from the source. Just because prosecutors couldn't prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Read hit O'Keefe with her car, it does not mean she did not. Her late boyfriend's law enforcement officer status only increased scrutiny on her actions. 'It plays a role [in her reputation],' Schiffer said. 'It's hard to undo.' Schiffer said Read will need to be 'extremely' careful while on the stand during her deposition to keep her reputation intact. 'She's probably better off doing [the trial] now, coming off the win,' Eric Schiffer, who helps high-profile people fix their reputations, told 'She needs to take every word seriously. Things can go boom.' Despite the buzz around her upcoming deposition, Galimidi doesn't expect to hear anything he hasn't already. 'I don't expect there to be any big revelation here,' he said. Damages Although the O'Keefe family filed for at least $50,000 in damages, they could be awarded a far higher sum. The question comes down to who can pay it for both the bars and Read. Although a jury can decide how much each defendant has to pay, if they don't have it, the family could be chasing it for years, especially with Read, who is a private citizen. 'Remember that this is how the Goldman family and Nicole Simpson's family went after OJ Simpson after he was acquitted or murder,' Day told 'They got a $33million judgment against OJ, but then had to try to collect on it.' 'One issue the family could face: What can they get from Karen Read, or is she judgment-proof? Meaning, what assets does she have that the family could get in a civil judgment?' A potential asset they family could garnish from is if Read is offered a book deal. They could tap into her royalties for years. Another way they could get money from Read, if she doesn't have the damages amount, is to garnish her wages. There are state limitations on what percentage can be taken out of her paychecks. 'You can try and garnish,' Galimidi said. 'That's entirely possible.' Galimidi suspects the O'Keefe family may or may not have bought in the two bars as collateral, as the establishments more than likely have insurance plans that will help cover them and offer a higher damages amount to the family. However, the locally-owned establishments might not have much in insurance, compared to big-named chained. 'There's a difference suing IBM versus Joe's Computer Shop [down the street],' the Florida lawyer said. He also believes the family has a good case against the bars for serving her an abundance of alcohol. 'It's a strong case against the bars,' he told 'It's a strong one for the plaintiffs because of her blood-alcohol [level].' However, Flaws said the plaintiffs still have to 'prove that she hit him' to prevail. Reputation Rehabilitation As the verdict was read out on Wednesday, cheers were heard outside the courthouse from her hoard of supporters, however experts warn Read has a long way to go before she can shake off the controversy. Read made headlines throughout the trial for her outlandish behavior during the case, which included winking at cameras and laughing and joking with her counsel in court. Schiffer said Read's name is a 'punch line' at the moment and she absolutely have to fix her public image before stepping back in the court. 'She's been shredded online,' Schiffer told He thinks it's 'critical' for Read to rapidly patch up the 'scraps' of her reputation prior to her civil trial as the burden of proof is much, much lower compared to a criminal case. 'That's her biggest challenge,' he said. If she loses the civil case, Schiffer said her reputation will experience 'spontaneous combustion.' 'It's not a death blow, but it will hobble her,' he said. And even if she wins, her reputation won't magically pop back either as many will accuse her of being of being 'famous for the wrong reasons,' he said. 'It's a good case, but it could be worse,' Galimidi said.
