New revelations have emerged in the case of a Michigan mother, aged 33, and a 28-year-old man who are potentially facing life imprisonment due to accusations of murdering the woman’s 3-year-old son nearly seven years prior, purportedly to make financial room to have another child together.

On Tuesday, during the court proceedings for the mother, Amanda Maison, and her then-boyfriend, Maurice Houle, investigators shared further insights into the death of the young boy, Matthew Maison. Both are charged with first-degree murder in connection with the 2018 death of the child. Additionally, Houle is facing three extra charges related to assaulting, resisting, or obstructing a police officer, incidents which allegedly occurred during his arrest last month.

According to the St. Clair County Sheriff’s Office, Matthew was found dead by his mother in his bed inside the family’s Port Huron Township home on Feb. 18, 2018.

During a preliminary hearing last month, prosecutors said that Matthew suffered “years of abuse at the hands of both defendants,” per courtroom footage posted by Detroit NBC affiliate WDIV.

“We came to realize of a scheme where both defendants conjured up this lie of previous injuries to the victim in our case, Matthew Maison, and came up with the lie about how the injury occurred prior to talking to investigators,” Assistant Prosecuting Attorney Josh Sparling said at the April hearing, adding that both defendants “admitted” that the other abused Matthew.

On Tuesday, prosecutors called two detectives as witnesses, one who investigated the case in 2018 and another who took over the case and interviewed Maison and Houle last month, according to a report from the Times Herald.

Love true crime? Sign up for our newsletter, The Law&Crime Docket, to get the latest real-life crime stories delivered right to your inbox.

The original detective testified that when he went to the Maison residence on the day of Matthew’s death, he noticed that the child had visible injuries, including bruises and a black eye. Soon after, he discovered that Matthew’s grandfather had previously reported Maison and Houle to Child Protective Services (CPS).

The incident involving CPS occurred after Maison claimed she saw Houle physically abuse Matthew because the child spilled some food. She reportedly told her father what she had witnessed, and he called CPS. However, when authorities arrived at the Maison home, the mother retracted her story and cut off ties with her father.

The same detective testified that when he interviewed Houle in 2018, the defendant initially claimed that Maison was the one who dealt with disciplining Matthew and the biological child of the two defendants. But under further questioning, the detective said Houle did admit that he sometimes punished Matthew by making the child do “military time-outs,” which involved kneeling in front of a wall with his hands on his head.

Prosecutors last month alleged that Matthew had been subjected to punishments that included “being placed in timeout on his knees where his head would be banged off the drywall.”

The new detective testified that when the couple was interviewed in April 2025, they both claimed to have witnessed the other attempt to smother Matthew with a pillow.

Maison also alleged that Houle had killed her son and even asked her to “take the fall” for him to keep him out of prison.

The judge said he would allow prosecutors to admit testimonial evidence that when Matthew was still alive, Maison became pregnant with her third child, but the couple mutually decided to have an abortion, according to the Times Herald. Despite wanting another shared child, the couple allegedly decided they could not afford the additional expense.

District Court Judge John Monaghan overruled objections from Maison’s defense attorney, reasoning that any prejudice against the defendants was outweighed by the evidence that Maison and Houle wanted another child and that Matthew was an impediment to that happening.

Prosecutors last month alleged that the couple had a “plan” to “kill Matthew to make room for a child the two of them could have together.”

Monaghan ultimately decided that the state had provided enough evidence to establish probable cause to have the cases bound over to the circuit court. It was not immediately clear when the defendants would make their first appearance in circuit court.