What contemporaneous video, bodycam, or photographic evidence exists from the Jan. 20 detention of Liam and his father?

1. The photographic record from Jan. 20: what exists and where it came from

Multiple outlets cite and reproduce a striking photograph taken during the Jan. 20 arrest that shows Liam wearing the blue bunny hat and a Spider‑Man (or Pikachu in some releases) backpack while an ICE officer stands nearby; those images were provided to news organizations by Columbia Heights Public Schools and taken at the family’s driveway, and they quickly circulated in national reporting ^{[1] [2] [3]}. News organizations including Reuters, AP and others published or credited similar still images from the scene that became central to public outrage and to the judge’s later opinion that included one of the photos ^{[7] [6]}.

2. Contemporaneous video: absence of a public record of bodycam or enforcement footage

None of the reporting reviewed identifies contemporaneous body‑worn camera footage or an official ICE video of the Jan. 20 operation released to the public; major outlets note the photo evidence but do not report that ICE or DHS has produced bodycam footage from that arrest to reporters or in court filings cited here ^{[7] [8] [9]}. The Department of Homeland Security and ICE have issued statements describing their account of the operation — including claims that the father fled and that an officer remained with the child — but those statements are not accompanied in the cited reporting by released bodycam or dashcam videos supporting the agency’s version ^{[8] [9]}.

3. What video does exist in the public record — mostly post‑detention material

Video that outlets explicitly report having obtained or reposted appears to show Liam and his father after their detention and during release: ABC News obtained footage of Conejo Arias carrying his son while boarding a flight back to Minneapolis, and Rep. Joaquin Castro posted and later released photographs of the pair after being freed from the Dilley facility ^{[4] [5]}. News coverage and congressional visits also generated photos from inside the detention center after Jan. 20, but those materials document the post‑arrest period rather than the moment of detention itself ^{[6] [10]}.

4. Competing narratives tied to the visual record and the limits of public evidence

The images from the driveway became the focal point for critics who said a child was effectively used as bait and traumatized, while DHS/ICE officials have insisted the child was not targeted and provided differing details about the sequence of events; both sides have leveraged the photographic record without a released contemporaneous enforcement video that might corroborate either narrative in full ^{[1] [8] [9]}. Reporting cites school officials and witnesses who describe the refusal to let another adult care for the child at the scene and lawmakers who later visited the child in Texas and described his condition — all accounts grounded around the same photos but no publicly disclosed bodycam footage ^{[11] [2] [6]}.

5. Gaps that matter for public accountability

Because the contemporaneous public record consists mainly of still photographs from the scene and post‑detention video and photos, key factual disputes about what ICE agents did at the moment of arrest — who was present, whether the child was isolated, and whether images capture all relevant context — remain unresolved in the publicly cited reporting; the sources reviewed do not indicate that agency bodycam or interior surveillance footage from Jan. 20 has been released to settle those questions ^{[3] [7] [8]}. The judge’s order and the national attention the photos drew have prompted scrutiny, but publicly available visual evidence from the actual arrest moment remains limited to the widely circulated photographs and eyewitness accounts referenced in news reports ^{[6] [1]}.