In a disturbing case that has shocked the community, a family services caseworker and her boyfriend are facing serious charges for allegedly abusing an 11-year-old girl under their care. Priscilla Mestaz, the caseworker, and her boyfriend, Anthony Machuca, stand accused of a series of heinous acts, including torture and starvation, against the child.

The charges against Mestaz and Machuca are severe, encompassing 27 felony and misdemeanor counts. These include torture, conspiracy to commit torture, child endangerment with the potential for significant harm or death, and assault with a deadly weapon. The allegations have been detailed in a statement released by the Stanislaus County Sheriff’s Office, as reported on their Facebook page.

The investigation was set into motion on January 31, when deputies responded to a call about a young girl refusing to return to the home she shared with Mestaz, who is both her aunt and a child services manager. The girl, whose identity remains protected, bravely disclosed to the deputies that she was a victim of physical abuse.

Authorities, including deputies and detectives from the special victims unit, approached Mestaz for clarification. She revealed that her niece had been living with her and Machuca since the summer of 2024. The investigation took a more serious turn when a search warrant allowed the sheriff’s office to uncover surveillance footage from the home. This footage reportedly supported the victim’s allegations, painting a grim picture of the abuse she suffered.

During the investigation, the sheriff’s office said they obtained a search warrant and discovered surveillance cameras at the house that “corroborated statements made by the victim.” 

They also determined, per the statement, that the girl had been primarily living in an uninsulated and unheated garage in the backyard, “leaving the child exposed to unsafe temperatures year-found.” 

According to a criminal compliant filed March 16 by the Stanislaus County District Attorney’s Office, which was referenced in the sheriff’s statement, the girl was also subjected to severe physical abuse between January 2025 and January 2026 that included “strangulation, punching and slapping.”  The couple is also accused of “withholding adequate nutrition” from the victim, causing her to be “malnourished” and forcing her to complete “strenuous physical exercise” or be threatened with assault, according to the compliant.

The victim was also restrained and dragged with a dog leash and subjected to “sustained verbal abuse,” prosecutors said.

Machuca was arrested the day deputies made their initial contact, but Mestaz—who was in an advanced stage of pregnancy—was not arrested until March 12, after she’d given birth, the sheriff’s office said. 

The baby and another 4-year-old child living in the home were taken into custody by the Stanislaus County Child Protective Services. 

The sheriff’s office said its possible additional charges could be filed against the pair as they continue to review the digital evidence in the case. 

Both defendants are currently being held on $1 million bail after detectives completed a bail enhancement in the case. 

They are both scheduled to be arraigned on the charges on March 26, according to court records reviewed by Oxygen. An attorney was not listed in the records for Mestaz. Oxygen reached out to Machuca’s attorney Joseph Cox, but did not receive an immediate response.

In a twist stemming from the “Arctic Frost” investigation into former President Donald Trump, two special agents have filed a lawsuit against Director Kash Patel and U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi. The agents claim their dismissals were unconstitutional and amounted to “political retribution” following the probe that led to Trump’s indictment concerning the events of January 6.

Since Trump’s presidency began, both the Department of Justice and the FBI have faced multiple legal challenges. These lawsuits often relate to the dismissal of agents for various reasons, including their involvement in investigations or their participation in protests, such as the kneeling during the George Floyd demonstrations. In this latest case, the unnamed agents, referred to as John Doe 1 and 2, collectively bring nearly three decades of experience to the table. They allege that their termination was directly linked to their roles in the Arctic Frost investigation from November 2022 to June 2023, which coincided with special counsel Jack Smith’s appointment and ultimately contributed to Trump’s indictment.

According to the plaintiffs, the firings were perceived as politically motivated. They argue that Patel, Bondi, and Trump, along with others who supported the dismissals, viewed the agents as politically opposed due to their association with Arctic Frost. The operation’s findings reportedly implicated Trump in criminal activities, leading to his federal grand jury indictment.

The lawsuit describes the dismissals as “pretextual,” suggesting that both agents were accused of “poor judgment and a lack of impartiality,” resulting in what was deemed a politicization of government duties. Their departures followed increased scrutiny by Republican lawmakers questioning Smith about the Arctic Frost investigation.

The agents claim that they were dismissed without any internal investigation, notification, or hearing. Furthermore, they were not presented with any evidence to justify their termination, nor were they given a chance to appeal the decision, as outlined in the lawsuit.

Doe 1 alleged that he was about to take his two kids — “already in costume” — trick-or-treating when he got called to a meeting an hour’s drive away that could not be ignored.

“This is it? Nothing can be done?” the plaintiff asked.

“It is what it is,” Washington Field Office Special Agent in Charge Paul Reid Davis answered, according the suit.

Three days later, John Doe 2, aware of Doe 1’s fate, said he received a call that he understood would be to initiate his firing — which U.S. Attorney Jeanine Pirro was allegedly “sorry” about and tried to prevent.

The agent had been working a “highly sensitive public corruption case” when he was told on Nov. 3 that “you are going to be terminated,” but the firing didn’t happen until the next day, the lawsuit said. That was because someone “had called on [his] behalf,” and that intercessor was Pirro, the filing claimed. The reprieve did not last and the agent was likewise “summarily dismissed.”

“[Assistant Director in Charge Darren] Cox confirmed to John Doe 2 that, the prior day, there had been an intercession on his behalf by U.S. Attorney Jeanine Pirro, which was why John Doe 2 was initially spared. Cox said Pirro had called him a second time, that day, and had asked him to relay the message that she was sorry for this process and appreciated all the work John Doe 2 had done,” the complaint went on.

Both plaintiffs recounted difficulties finding new employment, with one unidentified regulatory organization CEO declining to extend an offer to John Doe 1, described as the “sole breadwinner for his household” and two “young children,” based on the “optics” of his ouster. In addition, they understand the firings to be a “bar” on employment in any executive branch job.

In addition to Fifth Amendment due process claims, the plaintiffs alleged the firings violated the First Amendment as “improper acts of political retribution,” as evidenced by Patel’s own “defamatory speech” online.

“In the course of unlawfully terminating Plaintiffs’ respective employment without due process of law, Defendants—primarily through Patel—publicly connected the termination actions to allegations that the terminated Arctic Frost agents had been ‘weaponizing’ the FBI. This false and defamatory public smear impugned the professional reputation of all publicly identified fired Arctic Frost agents, including John Doe 1, suggesting they were something other than faithful and apolitical law enforcement personnel,” the suit concluded. “This public reputational smear has caused not only the loss of John Doe 1’s government employment but further harmed his present and future employment prospects. In the months following Plaintiffs’ unlawful terminations, Patel has continued to engage in such defamatory speech, publicly describing the fired Arctic Frost agents as ‘corrupt’ and compounding the reputational harm suffered by John Doe 1.”

Read the full filing here.