Is it true that the father of the son wearing a backpack and bunny hat a criminal and took him with him to a safe place
Executive summary
Photographs and reporting show a five‑year‑old wearing a bunny hat and backpack standing with immigration agents during an ICE operation in Minnesota; officials named the boy and his father and said the operation targeted the father, not the child [1]. Available reporting does not establish in the public record that the father is a convicted criminal or that he “took him with him to a safe place”; that claim is not supported by the cited sources and the Department of Homeland Security framed the arrest as targeting the father as an "illegal alien" whom it said "abandoned" the child when approached [1].
1. What the public reporting actually documents about the encounter
Photographs provided to the school district and circulated in news coverage show the boy, identified by outlets as Liam Ramos, wearing a blue bunny‑shaped winter hat and a backpack while an officer held his pack during an enforcement action at a driveway, and reporting names the father as Adrian Alexander Conejo Arias [1]. The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) posted statements saying ICE "did NOT target a child" and that the operation was conducted against the father, whom DHS described as an "illegal alien" and alleged he "abandoned" his son when approached by agents [1].
2. What DHS and local school officials are saying — conflicting framings
DHS framed the action as a law‑enforcement operation against the father and insisted the child was not the target, language aimed at justifying the agency’s approach [1]. By contrast, Zena Stenvik, superintendent of Columbia Heights Public Schools, publicly questioned why a five‑year‑old would be detained and argued a child cannot plausibly be classified as a violent criminal, a framing that highlights community alarm and disagreement with DHS’s posture [1].
3. Is there evidence in the reporting that the father is a convicted criminal?
The available sources in the packet do not provide court records, conviction notices, or reporting that definitively show the father is a convicted criminal; DHS described him as an "illegal alien" in a statement but the news items here do not attach a public criminal conviction or explain the charges or adjudication status in detail [1]. Where outlets have named individuals or reported agency characterizations, those assertions are claims by government actors or secondary reports — not a public court docket or conviction record contained in these sources [1].
4. Is there evidence he “took him with him to a safe place”?
None of the supplied reporting documents that the father “took him with him to a safe place”; instead the photos and accounts show agents present with the child during the enforcement action, and DHS’s statement emphasizes the father was the target and allegedly "abandoned" the child when approached, which is not the same as a voluntary relocation of the child to safety [1]. No source here corroborates an alternative narrative that the father carried the child away to safety prior to or during the operation [1].
5. Alternative viewpoints, agendas and what is left unproven
Two competing narratives appear in the reporting: an enforcement justification from DHS portraying the father as a law‑enforcement target [1], and local education officials and community voices highlighting the trauma and impropriety of a child being present during an ICE operation [1]. The DHS statement serves an institutional agenda of framing enforcement as narrowly targeted at criminal noncitizens; community leaders’ responses reflect an agenda to protect children and mobilize public opinion. Crucially, the supplied sources do not include court documents, prosecutorial filings, or independent verification of the father's criminal convictions or immigration case status, so firm determinations about criminality and motive cannot be drawn from this record alone [1].
6. Bottom line
Public reporting in the provided sources confirms that ICE conducted an operation in which a boy wearing a bunny hat was present and that DHS said the operation targeted the boy’s father [1], but those sources do not offer independent documentary proof that the father is a convicted criminal or that he deliberately “took him with him to a safe place”; those specific claims are not substantiated in the material available here [1].