08/07/2026
Josie Dikeman is seeking post-conviction relief.
Her defense attorney, Zacher, announced immediately before today’s sentencing hearing ended that he is already working on the filing. After the trial, the guilty verdict, and the sentence, Josie is still being given another opportunity to challenge accountability.
Our family cannot appeal Alexavier’s death.
We cannot file a motion to restore his life, reverse his suffering, or receive another chance to watch him grow. Alexavier should be 10 years old today, but his life remains permanently frozen at six.
Josie was sentenced to 27 years in prison followed by 15 years of extended supervision. Although that is presented as a 42-year sentence, only 27 years are confinement. Extended supervision is not prison, and Josie may still have the opportunity to live outside prison and experience years of freedom.
Alexavier received no remaining years.
The prosecutor did not even want to display Alexavier’s autopsy photographs again during sentencing because of how battered his little body was. That alone speaks to the severity of what he endured.
The evidence was so horrific that even the professionals responsible for prosecuting the case struggled with showing it again. Yet Alexavier had to experience everything those photographs revealed.
His femur was broken. His body was covered in injuries. His death was ruled a homicide caused by blunt-force trauma, with Xanax contributing to his death. He was six years old, defenseless, and entirely dependent upon adults to protect him.
Still, Josie has not apologized. She has not admitted what she did or demonstrated genuine remorse. Before sentencing was even over, the conversation had already turned toward obtaining relief for her.
Josie continues receiving attorneys, hearings, protections, and additional opportunities. Alexavier received no second chance at all.
This is why we cannot accept 27 years of confinement as proportional justice.
Homicide is the most irreversible crime one person can commit against another. A life cannot be returned. The future stolen from that person can never be restored. Sentences in homicide cases must punish the offender, protect the public, recognize the value of the victim’s life, deter others, and establish that taking a human life—especially the life of a defenseless child—will carry consequences equal to the permanence of that act.
This is not about revenge. It is about accountability.
But Alexavier’s story is also much larger than the criminal case or today’s sentence.
We have been raising concerns since day one. We have made multiple posts documenting our experiences, identifying contradictions, and expressing frustration with the agencies and officials involved. These concerns were not invented because we disagreed with the sentence. We were sounding the alarm before Alexavier died, while the investigation was unfolding, and throughout the criminal proceedings.
In November 2022, only months before Alexavier’s death, I called CPS because I was concerned about him. Before I could even explain the situation, the intake worker told me, “You can’t just call because you don’t like someone.”
At that point, all I had been able to provide was Alexavier’s name.
I became upset and told her, “This is how children die.”
She laughed at me.
Months later, Alexavier was dead.
The night before he died, our family was still desperately trying to protect him. After Jenah contacted me from prison with concerns, I initiated a welfare check.
Officer Joe Kernin later called me and told me that he had spoken with Alexavier at the front door and that Alexavier appeared “groggy.” He then told me we would need to wait until Monday to pursue the matter in family court.
I told him directly, “We do not have until Monday if what you are telling me is true.”
It was Friday night. Waiting until Monday would have left Alexavier in that home for the entire weekend.
According to what was communicated to us, Kernin contacted his supervisor, John Williams, about taking further action. Williams denied it and told him, “No.”
By the following day, Alexavier was dead.
Four months later, when I read the criminal complaint, I learned that what I had been told did not match the account documented in the case. There had been no meaningful conversation with Alexavier at the front door. He was reportedly essentially unconscious and in no condition to communicate as it had been represented to me.
At the time of that welfare check, our family did not know that Alexavier’s femur was broken. We did not know the full extent of his injuries. We also did not know that there was already an open CHIPS case involving him.
Alexavier was not an unknown child whose name had never entered the system. There was already an active child-protection matter and a documented history of concerns. That should have increased the urgency of every warning sign encountered that night.
Instead, Officer Kernin disclosed my identity to Josie as the person who called. Josie’s explanations for Alexavier’s injuries were accepted and treated as verified, while the concerns of the family attempting to protect him were minimized.
That raises questions that still demand answers:
Why was my identity disclosed to Josie? What did Kernin actually observe? How were Josie’s explanations supposedly verified? Did law enforcement check for the open CHIPS case? Was CPS contacted? What did Kernin communicate to Williams? Why was further action denied after I explicitly warned that Alexavier could not wait until Monday?
Our family has obtained and preserved the CHIPS, CPS, school, court, and other available records. What we are still fighting to obtain are the complete law-enforcement records and communications.
Those records may establish the full timeline, reveal what decisions were made, and show precisely how the account given to me that night compares with what officers actually encountered and documented.
There are other unresolved questions surrounding the investigation.
Members from different sides of Alexavier’s family have reported either hearing about or personally observing Investigator Williams at Josie’s residence before the incident was formally reported. Williams was later removed from the investigation. We are continuing to pursue the law-enforcement records necessary to verify the complete timeline and distinguish what can be proven from what still requires investigation.
Years ago, Josie personally told members of our family that her grandfather golfed with judges. Her mother, Becky, worked in Adult Protective Services despite losing her nursing license. Those facts alone do not prove improper influence or corruption. But when considered alongside the leniency we believe Josie received and the unresolved questions about the investigation, they deserve independent scrutiny rather than dismissal.
There are also serious concerns regarding Hintgen Elementary School.
The principal—who continues receiving awards, recognition, and professional advancement for her service to students and the community—extended condolences to Josie after Alexavier’s death. Yet when Jenah was released and our family continued demanding answers, that same principal sought a restraining order against Jenah and members of our family.
Compassion was extended to the person later convicted in connection with Alexavier’s homicide, while his grieving mother and family were treated as the threat.
There has been very little grace for Jenah or for the family that refused to stop asking questions. We have experienced resistance, withheld information, contradictions, dismissal, intimidation, and attempts to silence or discredit us.
A public system cannot function when its members appear more committed to protecting colleagues, agencies, reputations, and institutions than protecting the people they swore to serve.
An oath of public service is not an oath to shield one another from scrutiny. It is a commitment to exercise due diligence, act with integrity, protect vulnerable people, tell the truth, and remain accountable to the public.
Awards, titles, and promotions do not erase failures. They do not explain why a CPS worker laughed when I warned that a child could die. They do not reconcile the account I received after the welfare check with the circumstances later described in the criminal complaint. They do not explain why further action was denied after I warned law enforcement that Alexavier could not wait until Monday.
We did not fail to recognize the danger.
We called CPS. We contacted law enforcement. We warned them. We demanded intervention.
The systems entrusted with Alexavier’s safety failed to put the information together and protect him before it was too late.
That is why this story must be told in its entirety.
I will be starting a podcast and writing a book about Alexavier’s life, his case, the criminal proceedings, and the institutional failures surrounding his death. This is also my processing of healing - is to connect, learn, and share my advocacy efforts and hopefully help others in my shoes and also bring light to what we’ve endured. I am and have already reached out to documentary filmmakers because this story deserves a much larger platform and an independent examination.
There are too many layers, too many records, too many warnings, too many contradictions, and too many failures to explain in a single social-media post.
But this project will not exist only to document how Alexavier died.
Alexavier’s life is more than a criminal case, an autopsy report, a sentence, or an example of systemic failure. He was a child with a personality, a family, relationships, memories, laughter, and a future that should have belonged to him.
We want people to understand the complete picture.
We want the world to know who Alexavier was—not only what was done to him.
We want to preserve the love he gave, the people he touched, the memories he created, and the life he lived. We also want to expose every documented failure that allowed him to fall through the cracks despite repeated warnings from people who loved him.
The podcast, book, and potential documentary will follow the evidence. They will distinguish documented facts from allegations still being investigated. They will examine the records, the welfare check, the open CHIPS case, the agency responses, the criminal proceedings, the sentence, and the civil avenues we continue pursuing.
This is not an invitation to threaten or harass anyone. It is a commitment to truth, transparency, lawful accountability, and preserving Alexavier’s story.
We will continue pursuing civil and every other appropriate legal avenue. We will continue seeking the complete law-enforcement records. We will follow Josie’s post-conviction proceedings. We will preserve the evidence, confront the contradictions, and document what happened.
We have been saying these things since day one.
We said, “This is how children die.”
We said Alexavier could not wait until Monday.
Then Alexavier died.
Now the world deserves to understand how so many warnings could be ignored, how so many systems could fail one child, and why the person convicted still continues receiving opportunities that Alexavier will never have.
We are not finished. We are not going away. We will protect the truth, protect ourselves, and tell Alexavier’s complete story.
Justice for Alexavier—always.
