2-year-old subject of Amber Alert still missing from Rhode Island home
OHNSTON, R.I. — A 2-year-old boy kidnapped from a Rhode Island home where police made an early morning discovery of two bodies was found on Sunday night “in good health,” police said.
Johnston Deputy Police Chief Daniel Parrillo said the boy was found in Providence, but he would not provide any other details.
The search for the boy, Isaiah Perez, began after the two bodies were discovered about 5:20 a.m. at a home in Johnston, a town of 30,000 residents less than 10 miles from Providence. Two men were arrested in the double homicide and Isaiah's abduction, while police had continued their search “any place and every place” for the child, Parrillo said.
Parrillo said investigators believe the two were killed between 4:30 a.m. and 5 a.m. and the boy was taken from the home. The names of the two dead were not immediately released.
By the afternoon, Malcolm Crowell, 22, was arrested in Fall River, Mass., and Daniel Rodriguez, 27 or 28, was arrested that evening in Providence, Parrillo said. Both suspects are from Providence, but Parillo would not say why police suspect the two or how they are related to each other or to the victims.
Investigators were working to determine the relationships among the boy, his abductor and the two homicide victims. Parrillo said it was unclear whether the boy's abductor was living in the home, was a guest or was uninvited.
“What he was doing there, we have no idea,” Parrillo said earlier in the day. “We don't believe the child was harmed, and we're just hoping that he will be safely returned.”
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.