Investigators say gaming and video activity conflicted with a Florida couple’s account of how they monitored their 7-week-old daughter.

HOLLYWOOD, Fla. — At about 11:52 a.m., investigators say a cellphone belonging to Gracie Jai Tellez was still showing activity connected to Call of Duty. About one minute later, she called 911 to report that her 7-week-old daughter was cold, pale and unresponsive.

That narrow sequence became one piece of a much larger investigation into the October 2025 death of the infant and the conduct of Tellez and the child’s father, Robert Lee Ingram Jr. Police say forensic examinations of the couple’s phones contradicted parts of what they told detectives about supervising their daughter before the emergency. Both parents are charged with aggravated manslaughter of a child and child neglect. Authorities allege the baby suffered fatal, nonaccidental head trauma while in their care and that the parents failed to provide appropriate supervision and care. The allegations have not been proven in court.

The phone records offered detectives something interviews could not: time-stamped activity that could be compared with the couple’s statements. According to an arrest affidavit described by local news reports, Ingram’s phone showed Call of Duty activity from about 5:12 a.m. until 8:39 a.m. on Oct. 14 and again from about 10:33 a.m. until 11:49 a.m. Tellez’s device also showed extended use of the game, including a session that ran from about 10:38 a.m. until approximately 11:52 a.m. Police also found YouTube activity during the overnight and morning hours.

The activity drew investigators’ attention because Tellez and Ingram had described a different use for their phones. Police said the pair told detectives they sometimes connected the devices through FaceTime and used one as a makeshift baby monitor while their daughter slept. After obtaining search warrants and examining the devices, investigators said they found no evidence supporting that account during the period they considered important to the case. The affidavit characterized information the couple gave detectives as “not truthful,” according to reports describing the document.

The digital evidence did not tell investigators who caused the infant’s physical injuries, and publicly reported portions of the affidavit do not identify either parent as the person who delivered a specific blow. Instead, police used the records as part of a broader argument about what the parents were doing, how closely they were monitoring the baby and whether their descriptions of the hours before the 911 call could be trusted. The case against the two adults combines those phone records with medical findings, interviews, the child’s recent health history and observations about the home where the family was living.

Officers were sent to the couple’s residence on Farragut Street after Tellez called for help on Oct. 14. Hollywood police began CPR, and Hollywood Fire Rescue personnel took the infant to Joe DiMaggio Children’s Hospital. Doctors found a traumatic brain injury and other serious injuries that authorities later described as consistent with nonaccidental trauma. Reports citing the affidavit said doctors identified skull fractures, bleeding in both eyes, retinal detachments and hemorrhaging along the spine. The baby was declared brain dead on Oct. 18 and remained on life support until Oct. 22 in connection with organ donation.

Those hospital findings sharply changed the nature of the inquiry. Investigators were no longer dealing only with the unexplained collapse of an infant. Doctors told police the injuries were consistent with trauma involving blunt force and violent acceleration and deceleration. The Broward County Medical Examiner’s Office later determined that the child died from complications of blunt head trauma and classified the manner of death as homicide. A medical examiner’s homicide classification describes a death caused by the actions of another person; it does not determine which person is responsible or establish criminal guilt.

Detectives also looked at what was known about the baby’s health before the emergency. Police learned that a pediatrician had examined her on Oct. 8, six days before the 911 call. According to investigators, the doctor considered the infant healthy and had not documented significant injuries or major medical concerns. The medical examiner later described her as well-developed and well-nourished for her age. Investigators cited those findings while focusing on the period between that pediatric visit and the child’s hospitalization.

The parents’ own descriptions of Oct. 14 also became part of the case. Authorities said Tellez and Ingram initially reported that their daughter had been acting normally, had been fed and was placed in a bassinet before she was found unresponsive. Police said Ingram later gave different accounts concerning the timing of feeding, sleep and how often the baby had been moved in and out of the bassinet. Investigators said another version emerged when he participated in a reenactment at the residence.

No accident described by the parents accounted for the injuries doctors documented, according to investigators. Police also considered the size and layout of the home while evaluating whether an event capable of causing such serious trauma could have occurred without either adult noticing. The affidavit, as described in local reporting, said investigators believed it was unlikely that both parents could have been unaware of what happened. That conclusion is an allegation supporting probable cause and has not been tested before a jury.

The phone data helped police place those disputed statements against a fixed chronology. Investigators could compare when applications were active with the times the parents said they were feeding, checking on or monitoring the child. The records did not establish that playing a video game or watching YouTube caused the injuries. Rather, detectives cited the activity because they believed it contradicted the couple’s explanation of their supervision and showed that both phones were being used in ways different from the FaceTime monitoring arrangement the parents had described.

That distinction is important to the charges. The publicly reported case does not turn on gaming itself being criminal. Authorities allege that two caregivers responsible for a newborn failed to provide the level of care the child needed while she suffered fatal injuries. Investigators contend that the digital history, shifting statements and medical evidence together support allegations of culpable negligence. Prosecutors would still need to prove the elements of aggravated manslaughter and child neglect beyond a reasonable doubt if the cases proceed to trial.

The investigation continued for months after the child died. Hollywood police gathered medical records, reviewed forensic evidence and conducted additional investigative work before arrest warrants were issued on July 27, 2026. Federal authorities then became involved in locating the two defendants. The U.S. Marshals Service said Tellez and Ingram were arrested in Jacksonville on Aug. 7 following a fugitive investigation. They were later returned to Broward County to face the charges.

The arrests did not resolve one of the case’s central unanswered questions. Public accounts of the affidavit do not identify an eyewitness, confession or forensic finding that assigns the act causing the blunt head trauma to one parent. Police instead allege that both adults were responsible for the infant during the relevant period and that the circumstances support criminal charges against each of them. That leaves prosecutors with the task of showing how the evidence connects each parent individually to the offenses alleged.

The court process has since produced different custody outcomes for the two defendants. On Sept. 4, Broward Circuit Judge Edward H. Merrigan Jr. allowed Tellez to post a $15,000 bond after hearing testimony from her mother. Ingram remained held without bond at that point, according to local reporting. A bond decision determines the conditions under which a defendant may remain out of custody while a case proceeds; it is not a determination of guilt.

For investigators, the two phones remain significant because they provided a minute-by-minute record independent of the parents’ memories and later statements. For the court, however, those records will be only part of a larger body of evidence that includes medical findings, witness testimony and the defendants’ own accounts. Tellez and Ingram remain accused, not convicted, and the question of how their daughter suffered the injuries that caused her death has not been resolved by a trial.

Author note: Last updated September 22, 2026.