Share This Article
The three defendants face expanded charges in connection with the death of 7-year-old William Evans.
The new indictment adds several serious allegations to the case.
All three defendants entered not guilty pleas during Friday’s court proceedings. Their pleas mean prosecutors must prove the charges beyond a reasonable doubt at trial.
Rankin’s attorney also requested a competency evaluation in the case. A competency hearing would address whether Rankin can understand the court proceedings and assist in the defense. It would not determine whether Rankin is guilty or innocent.
Oakley boy case brings 13 new charges
The latest Oakley boy case development follows a grand jury indictment handed down Thursday. The indictment contains 13 counts against each defendant, according to local reporting. The charges include aggravated murder, murder, kidnapping, felonious assault, child endangerment and conspiracy.
The defendants are:
- Kaitlin Evans, William’s mother
- Nessa Keaney
- Kirby Rankin
Prosecutors allege the three defendants played roles in William’s death. All three have denied guilt through their not guilty pleas.
People reported that the three women lived together and co-parented William before his death. The report also said the boy had disabilities and that investigators found him dead inside a closet at a Cincinnati-area apartment on Aug. 6.
The new indictment represents a significant expansion of the criminal case. Prosecutors previously charged the three defendants after police discovered William’s body. The grand jury indictment now gives prosecutors additional allegations to pursue as the case moves forward.
The charges do not establish guilt. Under Ohio law, the defendants remain presumed innocent unless prosecutors prove the allegations in court.
The case has drawn significant attention because of the age of the victim and the allegations surrounding his final days. Investigators have described evidence suggesting prolonged abuse before William died.
The Cincinnati Exchange previously reported on the initial charges and the investigation into William’s death:
Cincinnati police say death of child in Oakley leads to murder charges against three adults
Oakley boy case: Three women charged after boy found dead in closet
Aunt Starts Fundraiser to Bury 7-Year-Old Oakley Boy
Oakley boy case includes aggravated murder allegations
The Oakley boy case now includes one count of aggravated murder against each defendant. The indictment also contains four murder counts for each defendant, according to reporting on the new charges.
The indictment further alleges kidnapping and felonious assault. Each defendant also faces four counts of child endangerment.
The conspiracy charges add another major element to the prosecution’s case. Prosecutors allege the defendants conspired in connection with aggravated murder and kidnapping.
Those allegations will now move through the Hamilton County court system. The prosecution must present evidence supporting each charge as the case progresses.
The charges include:
- Aggravated murder
- Murder
- Kidnapping
- Felonious assault
- Child endangerment
- Conspiracy
People previously reported that William’s body showed signs of extensive physical abuse. The report said authorities found him bound with duct tape after responding to the Cincinnati residence.
Police have continued investigating the circumstances surrounding William’s death. Additional evidence may emerge through court filings, hearings and future proceedings.
The expanded indictment does not mean the defendants have been convicted. A grand jury indictment only establishes that prosecutors obtained enough evidence to bring the listed charges forward.
Rankin requests competency hearing
The Oakley boy case also includes a separate legal issue involving Rankin. His attorney has requested a competency evaluation and hearing.
Ohio law allows the court, prosecutor or defense to raise the question of a defendant’s competency. The court must determine whether the defendant understands the nature and objective of the proceedings. The court must also determine whether the defendant can assist with the defense.
The Ohio Revised Code states that defendants are presumed competent to stand trial. A court can find a defendant incompetent when the evidence shows that the defendant cannot understand the proceedings or assist with the defense. (Ohio Laws)
The Ohio Supreme Court provides similar guidance in its competency reference materials. The court distinguishes competency from a not-guilty-by-reason-of-insanity defense. Competency concerns the defendant’s present ability to participate in the case. (Supreme Court of Ohio)
A competency hearing therefore does not decide whether Rankin committed the alleged offenses. It addresses Rankin’s current ability to participate in the legal process.
If the court finds a defendant competent, the criminal case can continue. If the court finds a defendant incompetent, Ohio law provides procedures for evaluation and possible treatment. (Ohio Laws)
The timing of Rankin’s competency proceedings could affect the pace of the case. The court will determine the next steps after reviewing the evaluation and hearing evidence.
[Internal link: Earlier Cincinnati coverage of Rankin’s criminal history]
Oakley boy case follows Aug. 6 discovery
Police found William dead on Aug. 6 during an investigation at a residence in Cincinnati’s Oakley neighborhood. Authorities later identified the child as William Evans.
The discovery led investigators to examine the circumstances inside the residence. Police subsequently arrested Evans, Keaney and Rankin in connection with William’s death.
People reported that William had disabilities and had suffered extensive physical abuse. The publication also reported allegations involving beatings, burns and other forms of abuse.
Those allegations remain part of the prosecution’s case. The defendants have not been convicted of any of the allegations.
The Hamilton County coroner determined that blunt-force trauma to the head caused William’s death, according to previous reporting. Investigators have continued examining the events that preceded his death.
Authorities have also reviewed communications and other evidence as part of the investigation. Prosecutors are expected to rely on that evidence as the case advances through court.
The case has also prompted scrutiny of the defendants’ backgrounds. Rankin previously faced a separate criminal case involving an alleged assault at Jungle Jim’s. That case resulted in a misdemeanor conviction before the latest indictment.
The prior conviction remains separate from the charges in William’s death. It does not establish guilt in the current case.
Oakley boy case defendants remain in custody
The three defendants remain in custody as the prosecution moves forward. Previous reporting indicated that each defendant faced a $1.1 million bond.
Their Friday pleas preserved their right to contest the allegations at trial. The court will now handle additional hearings and other pretrial matters.
The competency proceedings involving Rankin could become an early focus of the case. The court must first determine whether he can participate meaningfully in the defense.
The prosecution will also continue building its case against all three defendants. Future hearings could provide additional information about the evidence, charges and potential trial schedule.
According to the latest reporting, prosecutors are not currently seeking the death penalty. That decision could change if prosecutors revise their position as the investigation continues.
For now, the three defendants face the same 13-count indictment and have pleaded not guilty. The case remains pending in Hamilton County.
The Ohio courts will determine how the criminal proceedings move forward. The court’s decisions on competency, evidence and pretrial motions will shape the next stages of the case.
Readers can review the Ohio law governing competency hearings for additional information about how such proceedings work. Ohio Revised Code Section 2945.37 The Ohio Supreme Court also provides an adult competency reference guide explaining the legal standard.
