Case snapshot

• Victims: Emory Deacon, 2, and Harlow Deacon, 15 months.
• Location: Ladson, South Carolina.
• Found: September 29, 2026, during a welfare check.
• Cause of death: Starvation and dehydration due to neglect.
• Manner of death: Homicide for both children.
• Defendant: Justine Marie May, 31, the girls’ mother and primary caregiver.
• Charges: Two counts of homicide by child abuse.

What happened on September 29

Deputies responded to a home in the 3200 block of Pinewood Drive in Ladson after a caller reported concern about May and the children. Emory and Harlow were found dead inside. Charleston County Coroner Bobbi Jo O’Neal later identified the girls and determined that both died from starvation and dehydration due to neglect, with the manner of death classified as homicide.

Investigative documents reported by local media describe May as incoherent when deputies arrived. She reportedly said she had been in a “blur” for approximately two weeks and could not remember when she had last fed the children. Those statements are part of the criminal investigation; they are not, by themselves, a psychiatric diagnosis or proof of legal insanity.

The issue that changes this case: repeated welfare checks

Multiple reports state that law enforcement had conducted 13 welfare checks at the home before the girls were found. Family members and others had repeatedly expressed concern about May, the children, and the fact that relatives were not being allowed to see them.

The Post and Courier reported that, before the fatal discovery, a deputy told a caller that law enforcement was “no longer conducting welfare checks” at the residence. That statement — and the full chronology behind it — deserves close scrutiny. It raises several factual questions: who requested each welfare check, what deputies were told, whether they made direct visual contact with both children, what conditions they documented, whether child-protective services were notified, and whether repeated calls were viewed as a family dispute rather than a child-safety signal.

What the family says they were seeing

Texts and emails published in news reports show relatives trying repeatedly to see Emory and Harlow and expressing fear about the children’s safety. The girls’ father, Zack Deacon, has said through counsel that the deaths were preventable and that family, neighbors, and friends had been trying to get help.

Some relatives also voiced concern about May’s mental state. One family communication reportedly referenced the Lindsay Clancy case. That comparison should be treated as a worried relative’s observation, not as medical evidence. There is no publicly established psychiatric diagnosis that explains May’s conduct, and postpartum depression, postpartum psychosis, severe depression, substance use, psychosis, dissociation, and intentional neglect are clinically and legally distinct possibilities.

Clinical Lens: what starvation and dehydration mean in toddlers

Young children have much smaller physiologic reserves than adults. Prolonged inadequate intake can produce progressive dehydration, hypoglycemia, electrolyte abnormalities, kidney injury, cardiovascular instability, altered mental status, and ultimately multiorgan failure. The exact progression depends on fluid access, caloric intake, illness, temperature, baseline health, and the duration of deprivation.

One important forensic point is that severe malnutrition is usually not a single-moment event. Investigators can evaluate weight history, growth records, photographs, pediatric visits, food availability, gastrointestinal contents, laboratory findings, organ changes, and the physical condition of the home to help reconstruct the period of neglect. The autopsy and medical records will therefore be central to determining how long the children were medically compromised and whether signs should have been externally visible during earlier contacts.

What “homicide by child abuse” means in South Carolina

South Carolina Code § 16-3-85 provides that homicide by child abuse can apply when a person causes the death of a child while committing abuse or neglect under circumstances manifesting extreme indifference to human life. The statute specifically includes a failure to provide adequate food, clothing, shelter, or health care when that failure causes a condition resulting in death.

The current statute was expanded in 2026 to apply to children under 18. For the principal form of homicide by child abuse, the sentencing range is at least 20 years and can extend to life imprisonment.

The 13-check timeline we need

The most important public-record project in this case is reconstructing every welfare contact. For each call, we want:

• date and time of the request;
• who initiated it and exactly what concern was reported;
• whether deputies entered the home or remained outside;
• whether Emory and Harlow were physically seen;
• what the children looked like and how they behaved;
• whether food, water, sanitation, sleeping conditions, or medications were inspected;
• whether body-camera footage exists;
• whether DSS or another child-protection agency was contacted;
• whether dispatch notes linked the repeated calls together;
• what led to the reported decision to stop performing additional welfare checks.

Why repeated welfare checks can fail

A welfare check is not automatically a child-protection investigation. Deputies may encounter a caregiver who answers questions, presents a superficially orderly environment, or characterizes repeated callers as hostile relatives. Without direct access to the child, a clear allegation of abuse, visible danger, or coordination with child protective services, a brief law-enforcement contact can miss a deteriorating situation.

That does not answer whether the checks in this case were reasonable. It explains why the underlying records matter. Thirteen contacts create a pattern. The question is whether information from those contacts was siloed, discounted, or never escalated.

What we do not know yet

• The complete dates and outcomes of all 13 welfare checks.
• Whether deputies personally saw both girls during each relevant contact.
• Whether DSS had an open or prior case involving the family.
• The children’s recent pediatric growth records and weight trajectory.
• Whether toxicology or additional forensic testing identified other contributing factors.
• Whether May has a documented psychiatric history relevant to competency or criminal responsibility.
• Whether prosecutors will add, reduce, or modify charges after grand-jury review.
• What internal review the Charleston County Sheriff’s Office will conclude about its prior responses.

Jaded Evidence focus

This case should not be reduced to either “a mother starved her children” or “the system failed.” Both statements skip the evidentiary work. The criminal case must establish May’s conduct and state of mind under South Carolina law. Separately, the public deserves a documented accounting of how repeated warnings were handled before two toddlers died.

Our working question is simple: What did each person and agency know, when did they know it, and what did they do with that information?

Sources

• Live 5 News — investigative documents and “blur” statement
• Live 5 News — coroner findings and prior welfare checks
• The Post and Courier — welfare-check reporting
• People — family texts and emails
• South Carolina Legislature — homicide by child abuse statute