Woman charged after child wanders onto Route 51 in Brentwood
A Carrick woman and former Brentwood day care employee has been charged with putting her child at risk after police said her 2-year-old daughter was found wondering alone on state Route 51 last week.
Brentwood police on Jan. 23 charged Albertline Doerue, 26, of East Warrington Avenue, Carrick, with endangering the welfare of a child, after they accused her of leaving her child in an unlocked area at the Children's Academy International where she was employed, located in the 4000 block of Route 51, and failed to notify other staffers of the child's presence.
Doerue no longer works at the day care and left on her own accord, said director Iris Taylor.
Brentwood police received a call at 7 p.m. that the child had run out in front of a vehicle on Route 51, police Chief Robert Butelli said. Three people stayed with the girl until police arrived, he said.
The owner of the day care told police that she had “no idea” the child did not leave for the day with the mother, Butelli said. The child was not logged into a roster at the center, either, he said.
Doerue told police that she did not inform the day care center that she was leaving her child there when she left at the end of the day to go shopping, Butelli said.
The police chief said the child is “lucky” that drivers stopped when they saw her roaming on the street.
“It's a miracle that something didn't happen to the child, going out onto the main highway like that,” Butelli said.
Stephanie Hacke is a staff writer for Trib Total Media. She can be reached at 412-388-5818 or email@example.com.
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments â either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.