The case of Trinity Poague, a former Georgia beauty queen convicted of killing her boyfriend’s toddler son, has drawn widespread attention for its disturbing details and the swift unraveling of events that took place in a university dorm room. What began as a routine midday errand ended in tragedy as 18-month-old Romeo “J.D.”
Angeles was fatally injured during the brief period he was left alone with Trinity Poague. The subsequent trial laid bare a deeply strained relationship, allegations of resentment toward the child, and medical evidence that pointed clearly toward intentional harm rather than accident.
Now sentenced to life in prison with the possibility of parole after 30 years, the 20-year-old’s case stands as one of the most harrowing child-murder convictions in recent Georgia history. This blog examines the circumstances surrounding the toddler’s death, the courtroom battle over what happened in the minutes before he became unresponsive, and the broader implications raised by testimony about Poague’s emotional state and actions in the hours leading up to the fatal injuries.
Events Leading to the Child’s Fatal Injuries
On 14 January 2024, Trinity Poague was an 18-year-old freshman at Georgia Southwestern State University who had been dating Julian Williams, the father of the 18-month-old boy. Williams had brought his son, J.D., to his dorm room that weekend, and according to prosecutors, the child was in normal health shortly before the incident. Video footage reviewed by investigators showed the toddler behaving normally that morning and during the time Williams briefly left the dorm to pick up pizza and visit Walmart. It was during this brief window—estimated by prosecutors as less than 30 minutes—that the child suffered the catastrophic injuries that ultimately led to his death.
Witness testimony indicated that students nearby heard prolonged crying coming from the room before the noise abruptly stopped. This timeline became one of the prosecution’s central points, suggesting the child was conscious and crying in distress before suffering a rapid decline. When Williams returned to the dorm, he found the boy vomiting and barely conscious. He rushed him to a hospital, but the injuries were far too severe for medical intervention to save him.
The medical evidence presented in court was stark. The toddler had a fractured skull, extensive bruising, a brain bleed, and a lacerated liver—injuries that medical professionals testified were consistent with intentional force rather than a fall or accidental trauma. The findings indicated a violent assault occurring within an hour of hospital arrival, aligning with the period during which Trinity Poague had sole custody of the child.
Prosecutor Lewis Lamb told jurors that at the time Williams left, J.D. was a “healthy little boy,” and by the time he returned, the child was already in what Lamb described as a “death countdown.” The prosecution argued that the brevity of the timeframe made it impossible for anyone other than Trinity Poague to have inflicted the injuries. Throughout the presentation of evidence, the prosecution emphasized the medical conclusions as definitive proof that the toddler had been struck with force.
Trinity Poague's face changing after hearing the verdict to the rest of the charges just shows she was faking everything. pic.twitter.com/qVLPFJbeSV
— Bre Sherree (@Bellamy__Blue) December 5, 2025
Trinity Poague, who had been crowned Miss Donalsonville in 2023 and once participated in the National Peanut Festival beauty pageant, had no documented history of violent behavior before the incident. Yet prosecutors argued that her outward poise concealed a growing hostility toward the toddler and frustration with the demands of her relationship with Williams. They suggested these emotions erupted in violence when she was suddenly left alone with the child. For the jury, the combination of medical testimony, timeline evidence, and Poague’s own messages appeared to construct a cohesive narrative, ultimately leading to a conviction for felony murder and aggravated battery.
Courtroom Testimony and Jury Deliberations
The trial featured starkly contrasting narratives from the prosecution and defense. Trinity Poague’s attorneys acknowledged the severity of the child’s injuries but argued that multiple possible explanations had not been sufficiently ruled out. Defense attorney W.T. Gamble suggested the toddler may have fallen from the dorm room’s 40-inch-tall bed, potentially causing brain injuries. He also raised the possibility that harm could have been inflicted earlier—perhaps the night before, during a shower shared by Poague and Williams, or while Williams was intoxicated.
The defense emphasized that no witness saw Trinity Poague strike the child and that circumstantial evidence alone should not be enough to convict. They attempted to cast doubt on the prosecution’s timeline by highlighting the chaotic circumstances surrounding the child’s final hours, including the behaviors and condition of the adults present. Gamble also emphasized Poague’s youth and emotional distress during the interrogation and trial.
The prosecution countered each of these points with detailed medical testimony. Experts testified that the injuries were too severe and too specific to have resulted from an accidental fall. The fractured skull and internal injuries, they said, indicated multiple impacts or blows, not a single fall. The brain bleed’s timing further supported the conclusion that the trauma occurred within the hour before the child’s arrival at the hospital—which was during the period when Trinity Poague was alone with him.
One crucial piece of evidence presented during the trial was a text message Trinity Poague sent to her roommate on the day of the incident: “I can’t stand being around J.D. anymore. He hates me and I hate him.” Prosecutors argued that this message revealed clear animosity toward the toddler and helped establish motive. They contended that the relationship between Poague and Williams was becoming increasingly strained because of his responsibilities as a father, and Poague resented the child’s presence and the attention Williams devoted to him.
The jury deliberated on charges including malice murder, felony murder, and aggravated battery. While Trinity Poague was acquitted of malice murder—a charge requiring the intent to kill—she was found guilty of felony murder, which applies when a death results from committing a felony, even without intent to kill. The jury also found her guilty of aggravated battery for the severe injuries inflicted on the child.
As the verdict was read, Trinity Poague broke down in tears. Within minutes, Judge W. James Sizemore Jr. delivered a life sentence with the possibility of parole after 30 years. The judge gave no extended remarks, stating simply that the sentence reflected the severity of the conduct for which she had been convicted.
Following her conviction, it was reported that Trinity Poague was formally stripped of her Miss Donalsonville title. Her social media posts from the previous year, in which she expressed gratitude for her pageant experiences and referenced her faith, were widely circulated online as the public attempted to reconcile the persona she displayed with the events presented in court.
Public Reaction and Broader Implications of the Case
The case has generated widespread public reaction due to its combination of shocking violence, the youth of both defendant and victim, and the unexpected setting of a college dorm room. Many observers expressed disbelief that an 18-year-old student with no public record of violent behavior could be convicted of such severe crimes. Yet the details presented during the trial, particularly the medical evidence, left little ambiguity in the jury’s view of what happened during the brief window in which Williams was away.
Read : 18-Year-Old Emily Finn Shot Dead by 17-Year-Old Ex-Boyfriend Austin Lynch in Murder-Suicide Attempt
This case has also prompted renewed discussion about the pressures faced by young couples navigating relationships involving children from previous partners. Poague’s documented resentment, as conveyed in her text message, became a focal point during the trial and has since been cited in broader conversations about emotional readiness, jealousy, and the strain that parenthood can place on developing relationships. While most such struggles do not result in tragedy, the events in this case offer a stark example of how unaddressed tensions can escalate.
The incident additionally highlighted issues surrounding campus safety and the suitability of student housing for children. Although universities frequently allow visiting family members, the situation raised questions about the readiness of dormitory environments to accommodate infants or toddlers, especially during overnight stays. While no policy failures were identified in relation to the death, the location of the incident drew attention simply because severe child injuries in college settings remain extremely rare.
In the aftermath of the conviction, the community in Donalsonville—where Poague once held a local beauty title—expressed a mixture of shock and sadness. Some residents pointed to her previously warm public presence, while others were struck by the severity of the jury’s findings. Pageant committees moved quickly to remove her from any official association and update public records relating to her titles.
Poague’s sentencing to life in prison with the possibility of parole after 30 years ensures she will spend decades incarcerated before any potential release. At that time, she would be in her late 40s, a reality that underscores the gravity of the verdict. The outcome reflects the court’s assessment of the severity of harm inflicted on a defenseless toddler and the irreversible consequences of the injuries.
The case remains a particularly disturbing one due to the rapid progression from routine daily activity to fatal violence within a matter of minutes. Court testimony made clear that J.D. was alive, mobile, and interacting normally before Williams left for pizza. The transformation from a healthy child to one fatally injured in such a short span of time formed the central basis of the prosecution’s argument and ultimately shaped the jury’s decision.
As the legal proceedings now conclude, the case stands as a reminder of the vulnerability of young children and the devastating outcomes that can arise from unchecked anger or resentment within domestic or caregiving situations. The details presented in court will continue to inform discussions around child protection and the responsibilities borne by anyone entrusted with a child’s care.