Everett, Massachusetts

In the second week of October, Josiele Berto got a call from the Everett, Massachusetts, police. Her 13-year-old son Arthur had been arrested, and she had to go pick him up.

Or so she was told on the phone. By the time she reached the police station, however, her son was gone – taken away, she learned, by Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents. After an overnight stay at an ICE facility in Everett, they shipped him to a juvenile detention center in Winchester, Virginia, more than 500 miles away.

Arthur, a middle-school student, had been arrested after the police received a tip that he had threatened a classmate while exhibiting a double-bladed knife. The Berto family had come to U.S. from Brazil, and his mother had a pending asylum case. But the police were vague about how ICE had gotten wind of the boy’s arrest. At a news conference, Police Chief Paul Strong said it was the first time “to the best of my knowledge” that a juvenile had been removed from police custody by federal immigration authorities.

Arthur’s age and the swift handoff to ICE drew widespread criticism. Dozens of Everett residents protested outside City Hall, demanding his return and condemning his detention as unjust. “This is a rogue agency,” said State Senator Sal DiDomenico.

Under pressure to justify ICE’s actions, a top Department of Homeland Security official described Arthur Berto in a social media post as a “public safety threat with an extensive rap sheet” who had been carrying a firearm at the time of arrest. That claim has been disputed by the police chief and the mayor: both have said that no firearm was recovered.

His mother has received intermittent phone calls from Arthur – calls in which, she told CNN, he “cried a lot because he had never been away from home or his family.” Otherwise, she has had no way to contact him.

“Regardless of the nature of the allegations, they remain just that – allegations – and every individual is entitled to due process of law,” Andrew Lattarulo, a lawyer for the family, said in response to DHS’s assertions. “That principle applies even more strongly to a minor who is far below the age of legal consent.”

“DHS commenting publicly about a juvenile’s allegations is improper,“ Lattarulo added. “They seem to forget he’s 13 and not 31.“

Posted on October 21, 2025