Minor/privacy note: this story avoids reposting photos of children or explicit alleged abuse details from the social posts. It reports only what is necessary to source-check the public Amber Alert record and the court-accountability claims now circulating online.
The lead is a long Facebook/Substack post from The Women’s Coalition titled “Police Hot on Heels of Fleeing Mom but Public Outcry Stops Them! Well, Sort of...”. It argues that an Alberta mother fled to protect a child, that public backlash undermined the Amber Alert, and that a family-court judge should be scrutinized.
NewsForBC is not adopting those claims as fact. The public-interest question is narrower: what do official police and alert records confirm, what is only alleged by an advocacy post, and what court records would be needed before readers can judge the family-court side?
What is confirmed by official records
Alberta RCMP said an Amber Alert was issued after 6-year-old Lanakai Morrison was taken from Valhalla Centre near Beaverlodge, Alberta, on July 7, 2026. RCMP named Krista Morrison as the child’s biological mother and said Daniel Ludwig and another child may be with them.
In a later update, RCMP said there had been a sighting in Fort St. John, British Columbia, on the morning of July 8 and that Beaverlodge RCMP were working with B.C. police partners. Alberta’s emergency-alert record shows the Amber Alert was issued July 8 and cancelled July 10 at 15:15.
Vancouver Sun/Postmedia reported that the Amber Alert was cancelled in Alberta and B.C. while the child was still missing, and quoted the RCMP explanation that there was “no reasonable expectation” the public in Alberta could act on the alert instructions.
What the advocacy post adds — and what it does not prove
The Women’s Coalition post makes serious family-court allegations. It says the mother fled because of alleged abuse concerns, criticizes police and mainstream media, and names Judge/Justice Jasmine Sihra in connection with the family-court matter. The post also acknowledges that “not a lot is known” about the custody case and says some online sources may not be accurate.
Those are important caveats. NewsForBC has not reviewed a public court order, court transcript, custody application, file number, child-protection record, police investigative file, or hearing record for the family-court side. Without those records, readers should not treat the social post’s claims about abuse, judicial reasoning, conflicts, police motives or court process as established fact.
Evidence labels
- Confirmed: Alberta RCMP issued an Amber Alert and identified the child, mother, possible travelling companions and Beaverlodge/Valhalla Centre origin.
- Confirmed: RCMP reported a Fort St. John, B.C. sighting and said B.C. police partners were involved.
- Confirmed from alert record: Alberta Emergency Alert records the alert as issued July 8 and cancelled July 10.
- Reported by Vancouver Sun/Postmedia: the alert was cancelled in Alberta and B.C. while the child was still missing, with RCMP saying Alberta public-action criteria were no longer met.
- Advocacy claim / not independently verified: the family-court abuse, conflict, motive and judge-conduct claims in the Facebook/Substack posts.
- Court-record gap: no public court order, file number or transcript was located in this review to confirm the stated family-court chronology or judicial reasoning.
What should be released or clarified
- Which Amber Alert criteria were met at issuance, and which criteria no longer applied at cancellation?
- What public information can police release without endangering a child or breaching family-court/privacy law?
- If family-court orders drove the public-safety response, can the court provide a redacted procedural chronology without identifying sensitive child details?
- If a judge is being named online, what public record confirms the judge, date, order type, reasons and any recusal?
- How should media report Amber Alerts involving custody disputes without turning untested family allegations into either proof or silence?
NewsForBC view: the official public-safety record is real, and the B.C. connection is real. The family-court story may be important, but it needs documents. The safest reporting path is to separate the RCMP/alert facts from the advocacy allegations and ask for redacted records where privacy law allows.