Fugitive Brazilian Child Rapist Hid in Massachusetts Daycare While State Funds Flowed

n a troubling case that has drawn sharp criticism of immigration enforcement and state oversight, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) arrested a Brazilian fugitive convicted of child rape who had been living inside a licensed Massachusetts daycare, highlighting glaring gaps in both immigration and childcare regulatory systems. WTVC+1

Convicted in Brazil, Fled Justice, Settled in Massachusetts

Andre Tiago Lucas — convicted in Brazil for raping a vulnerable 13-year-old girl and sentenced to more than nine years in prison by a court in Minas Gerais in 2016 — fled his home country to evade his sentence. After entering the United States illegally, Lucas eventually made his way to Massachusetts, where he remained at large until his arrest by ICE enforcement officers in Bourne in late 2024. WTVC

ICE officials publicly acknowledged that Lucas had been convicted abroad and that he unlawfully stayed in the U.S. while avoiding incarceration in Brazil. U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement

Residence Inside a Licensed Daycare Sparks Outrage

Local news investigations revealed that Lucas had been residing with Franciele Nunes — the operator of a licensed home daycare in Hyannis, Cape Cod — and that he had been living at that location for months before his arrest. WTVC+1

Although the daycare was officially licensed by the Massachusetts Department of Early Education and Care (EEC), records show it passed five separate inspections without any indication of Lucas’s presence during those visits. State regulations require background checks of adults residing in or frequently visiting licensed daycare homes, but international criminal histories are not checked, and immigration status is not considered, meaning Lucas’s Brazilian conviction would not have been flagged even if his presence was known. Boston 25 News

Taxpayer Funds Flowed for Years

A Boston 25 News investigation later uncovered that the licensed daycare received more than $100,000 in taxpayer funds over several years, including:

• $43,000 in rent/utilities grants

• $65,000 in child care subsidy payments

These state funds were distributed through programs designed to support licensed daycare providers, despite Lucas’s fugitive status and undisclosed presence in the household. Boston 25 News

Systemic Shortcomings Exposed

The case has prompted criticism from both community members and elected officials who argue that this incident underscores systemic failures on multiple fronts:

⚖️ Immigration Enforcement:
Critics argue that current systems failed to flag and detain a convicted sex offender sooner, allowing him to remain at large inside a community childcare setting. WTVC

Daycare Oversight:
The EEC’s background check process does not include international criminal convictions, nor is immigration status reviewed, which means fugitives with serious foreign convictions can go undetected. Inspections — even when frequent — may miss concealed residents if they are not officially disclosed. Boston 25 News

Public Spending and Accountability:
Because the daycare continued receiving state funds while housing Lucas, some lawmakers have questioned whether stronger vetting and reporting requirements should be in place before taxpayer money is granted. Boston 25 News

Massachusetts State Senate Republicans attempted to introduce amendments that would require international background checks for daycare household members, but those measures have not been enacted. Boston 25 News

Public Safety and Policy Debate

The discovery of Lucas’s presence in the daycare home ignited a broader debate over immigration policy and sanctuary protections in Massachusetts. Opponents of current policies argue that lax cooperation between state agencies and federal immigration authorities can create risks to community safety, especially where vulnerable populations like children are concerned. WTVC

Supporters of immigrant rights and stronger social safety nets counter that while the facts of the case are serious, they represent a rare and extreme outlier, not a widespread pattern; they stress that policy reforms should avoid stigmatizing immigrant families as a whole.