Ladson Tragedy: Social Services Knocked Twice. No One Answered.

by JENN WOOD

***

An investigator with the South Carolina Department of Social Services (SCDSS) twice knocked on the door of a Ladson home without getting an answer. A deputy later weighed another request for help against a history of harassment complaints.

By the time authorities entered the residence on September 29, 2026, it was too late – two-year-old Emory Deacon and 15-month-old Harlow Deacon were dead.

Newly released Charleston County Sheriff’s Office (CCSO) offer a closer look at these final requests for help — and raise fresh questions about how agencies shared information and assessed the girls’ safety after earlier visits had found no immediate danger.

On the morning of the discovery, the SCDSS investigator told a deputy about his two unsuccessful visits. He initially planned to return the following day with a law-enforcement escort. Another caller’s concerns prompted a joint response that afternoon.

The supplemental reports (.pdf), provided to FITSNews by CCSO, do not establish when those unanswered visits occurred. But they add important details to a timeline now facing scrutiny beyond the sheriff’s office.

Charleston County coroner Bobbi Jo O’Neal has requested an independent investigation of the agencies’ response, DSS has announced a review process and the girls’ father has spoken publicly about his efforts to obtain help.

The children’s mother, Justine Marie May, 31, faces two counts of homicide by child abuse. O’Neal determined the girls died from starvation and dehydration due to neglect. She estimated they had been dead for three to five days before deputies found them.

***

ANOTHER WARNING

According to the details in the supplemental reports, the day before the girls were found, a woman who described herself as a distant friend of May’s contacted CCSO about Facebook posts she believed were out of character.

A deputy assigned to handle the September 28 request spoke with the woman, who described May as sharing unusually personal information online and cutting off contact with her family. The caller had driven past the home earlier that day and seen May sitting in her vehicle.

In documenting the response, the deputy cited the harassment complaints associated with the address.

“Due to previous and ongoing harassment issues that I was informed about at this address, I requested [redacted] screenshot the concerning posts and send them to me via email,” the deputy wrote.

The woman supplied screenshots and screen recordings at approximately 5:00 p.m. EDT, including posts showing May’s text and email exchanges with relatives. The deputy reported finding no apparent threats or indications of thoughts of self-harm or harm to others, but forwarded the material to a supervisor 40 minutes later.

***

***

The deputy also encouraged the caller to contact SCDSS. In an email that evening, the woman said she would do so the next morning.

While the report documented the collection of those materials and their referral for supervisory review, it did not explain what the supervisor concluded or describe anyone going to the home that evening to check on the children.

The distinction is significant: an absence of explicit threats in May’s posts did not establish her daughters’ condition. What assessment, if any, was made of their welfare after the screenshots reached CCSO remains unclear.

By then, however, the girls may already have been dead. September 28 fell after the coroner’s estimated window for their deaths, making this account relevant to how authorities handled the final warnings and discovered the children — without establishing that a response that evening could have saved them.

***

RELATED | Two Young Girls Found Dead In Ladson

***

UNANSWERED VISITS — THEN A DISCOVERY

The morning of September 29, 2026 the deputy contacted DSS to ask about May’s case. An investigator returned the call at 11:28 a.m. EDT and said the case had been assigned to him.

According to the deputy’s report, the investigator described an earlier joint visit with deputies as “unfounded,” but said he had personally returned to the home twice since then without getting an answer at the door. He planned another attempt the following day, this time with a law-enforcement escort.

The report did not date those unsuccessful visits or explain what prompted them — details that could help establish what the agencies knew when an on-duty CCSO supervisor decided on September 22 to discontinue additional welfare checks.

CCSO sheriff Carl Ritchie previously attributed that decision to earlier assessments, the involvement of other agencies and an absence of new actionable information indicating an immediate threat. How SCDSS’s continued attempts to reach May factored into that assessment remains unclear.

Before the investigator’s planned return, another caller raised concerns.

***

***

At 12:33 p.m. EDT, dispatch notified the deputy of a welfare check request from someone who reported May walking alone in the neighborhood roughly one to two hours earlier. The caller, who requested anonymity, considered that unusual because May ordinarily had her children with her.

The deputy relayed the information to another deputy and contacted the SCDSS investigator again, asking him to accompany them to the residence that afternoon.

They arrived at approximately 1:17 p.m. EDT. Repeated knocking at the front door and a window initially went unanswered, according to the report. When May eventually opened the door, she acknowledged retrieving a card the SCDSS investigator had left.

Told they needed to check on her children, May sighed and walked down the porch steps, leaving the door open.

Much of the subsequent account is redacted. The visible portions described personnel entering the residence and a deputy signaling for May to be handcuffed. By 1:27 p.m. EDT, dispatch had been advised she was in custody.

A separate supplement described the visible living room, kitchen and sitting area as appearing normal, with no visible damage. Inside that same home, though, deputies found Emory and Harlow dead.

***

RELATED | Lowcountry Tragedy: Family Says ‘No One Listened’

***

SCRUTINY BEYOND THE SHERIFF’S OFFICE

The new records follow developments that have expanded the debate beyond CCSO’s internal review.

On October 16, 2026, O’Neal announced that she had requested an independent S.C. Law Enforcement Division (SLED) investigation, verbally and in writing, on October 9. She sought an examination of the actions and timelines of agencies with significant involvement before the deaths, including CCSO, SCDSS and Mobile Crisis.

SCDSS also announced October 16 that it would review the case through local and state child-fatality review processes involving community partners and other stakeholders. Mobile Crisis said it would assist in those reviews.

Those reviews serve a different purpose from the independent investigation of agency conduct requested by the family.

SLED has already assisted in investigating the children’s deaths; however, to date, have not undertaken the separate independent investigation sought by the coroner.

The girls’ father, Zachary Edward “Zack” Deacon, also spoke publicly on October 16, continuing his demand for answers about the response to his family.

***

***

THE FAMILY’S DEMAND

In a statement dated October 7, 2026, attorney Gedney M. Howe IV, who represents Deacon, challenged Ritchie’s public defense of CCSO while the family was still seeking access to the underlying file.

“The sheriff cannot tell the public the file is complete enough to reach conclusions while telling the children’s father it is not ready for him to see,” Howe wrote.

Howe requested an independent review of Deacon’s arrest, the decision to stop welfare checks, interagency coordination and whether emergency protective custody was considered.

Deacon was arrested September 12, 2026 on a second-degree harassment warrant. Previously released reports described alleged unwanted communications and drive-bys, but also included continuing welfare complaints among the circumstances cited in seeking the warrant.

The newly released September 28 narrative shows that the harassment history remained part of how a subsequent request was evaluated. It does not, by itself, establish that the deputy’s response violated policy or the law.

At his October 9 news conference, Ritchie said he was reviewing CCSO’s policies, communications and responses, including whether additional steps could have been taken and whether welfare checks should ever be discontinued.

“If our review identifies shortcomings, we’ll absolutely acknowledge them,” he said.

The supplemental reports now give those reviews more specific questions to answer: When did SCDSS make its unsuccessful visits? What information was shared with CCSO? What did the supervisor decide after receiving the September 28 screenshots? And how did earlier findings of no immediate danger inform later decisions when relatives and friends could no longer check on the girls themselves?

For a family that remembers Emory’s dancing and Harlow’s little kisses, those questions reach beyond the final response to Pinewood Drive. They concern the weeks when the girls were still alive — and whether the agencies repeatedly called upon to help did everything they could to protect them.

***

THE SUPPLEMENTAL REPORTS…

***

ABOUT THE AUTHOR …

As a private investigator turned journalist, Jenn Wood brings a unique skill set to FITSNews as its research director. Known for her meticulous sourcing and victim-centered approach, she helps shape the newsroom’s most complex investigative stories while producing the FITSFiles and Cheer Incorporated podcasts. Jenn lives in South Carolina with her family, where her work continues to spotlight truth, accountability, and justice.

***

SOUND OFF…

Got something you’d like to say in response to one of our articles? Or an issue you’d like to address proactively? We have an open microphone policy! Submit your letter to the editor (or guest column) via email HERE. Got a tip for a story? CLICK HERE. Got a technical question or a glitch to report? CLICK HERE.