Two defendants have been found competent to stand trial as prosecutors pursue a 13-count case against all three accused co-parents.

CINCINNATI, Ohio — The criminal case over the death of 7-year-old William Evans-Ellis has moved well beyond the murder and child-endangerment charges filed immediately after police found him dead in an Oakley apartment. His mother and two other adults who shared responsibility for his care now face 13 felony counts each, including aggravated murder, kidnapping and conspiracy, and all three have pleaded not guilty.

The latest significant court development came Sept. 15, when Hamilton County Common Pleas Judge Christian Jenkins found Kirby Rankin, 33, and Nessa Keaney, 23, competent to stand trial. Competency in this context addresses whether a defendant understands the proceedings and can assist with a defense; it does not determine guilt or innocence. No competency examination was ordered for William’s mother, 38-year-old Kaitlin Evans. The rulings cleared one procedural question that had delayed the cases against Rankin and Keaney while prosecutors continued to pursue allegations that the three adults participated in a prolonged pattern of abuse before the child’s death.

A Hamilton County grand jury indicted Evans, Rankin and Keaney on Aug. 13, one week after William was found dead. Each was charged with one count of aggravated murder, four counts of murder, one count of kidnapping, one count of felonious assault, four counts of endangering children and two conspiracy counts. Prosecutors have said the aggravated murder charge could result in life in prison without parole if a defendant is convicted. At their Aug. 14 arraignments, all three entered not-guilty pleas, leaving prosecutors with the burden of proving the allegations in court.

The indictment marked a major escalation from the initial case presented after police entered the Madison Road home Aug. 6. Officers found William dead inside a closet, where authorities said his body had been restrained with duct tape. The Hamilton County Coroner’s Office later determined that he died from blunt-force trauma to the head. Coroner Dr. Lakshmi Sammarco said the boy also had an upper-arm fracture, numerous bruises of different ages and additional injuries that investigators were examining. Those findings became part of a broader inquiry into how long William had allegedly been mistreated and who was responsible.

Prosecutors say Evans, Rankin and Keaney lived together and functioned as William’s co-parents. That relationship is important to the state’s case because prosecutors contend each adult had a duty to protect the child, secure medical help when necessary and prevent harm. Hamilton County Prosecutor Connie Pillich said when announcing the indictment that the three had failed in those responsibilities. Her comments represent the prosecution’s position; defense lawyers have challenged the idea that their clients shared equal responsibility for the violence that allegedly occurred in the apartment.

The charging documents also introduced allegations that investigators had obtained electronic communications among the defendants. Prosecutors say text messages exchanged through the Signal messaging service between July 1 and Aug. 6 were acts taken in furtherance of alleged conspiracies to kidnap and kill William. Court reporting on the indictment also identified an audio message that Rankin allegedly sent to Keaney on July 4. Publicly released accounts have not provided the full contents of the messages, and the allegations surrounding those communications have not been tested at trial.

Investigators have described evidence suggesting William endured abuse for weeks before his death. At an early court hearing, a homicide detective testified that the boy had injuries consistent with repeated beatings. Authorities also alleged that he had been held underwater and showed signs consistent with burns. The coroner separately reported bruising and a broken bone. Those descriptions have been presented in restrained terms because the case involves a child and because many details remain allegations that prosecutors will have to establish through admissible evidence.

The timing of William’s death has also become an important part of the investigation. Sammarco estimated that the boy had probably been dead for at least a day by the time police found him Aug. 6. Prosecutors have said the three adults left the apartment Aug. 5 to take a dog to a veterinary appointment while William remained at the home. The coroner’s estimate raised questions about whether William may already have been dead at that point, although a precise public timeline of his final hours has not been established in the court record reviewed for this report.

Police were directed to the Madison Road residence after Evans arrived barefoot at Mercy Health’s Rookwood emergency department on Aug. 6 and told medical staff that Rankin was threatening to kidnap and kill her son, according to local reporting on the investigation. Hospital staff contacted authorities, and officers were sent to the apartment. What police discovered there transformed the incident from a report about a possible threat into a homicide investigation involving all three adults who had been living with William.

Defense attorneys began drawing distinctions among the defendants soon after their arrests. Evans’ attorney argued at an early hearing that evidence would show another person caused William’s death and characterized the case against Evans as involving a failure to act rather than personally inflicting the fatal injury. An attorney representing Keaney also argued that she was less responsible than the other defendants and said she had attempted to care for some of William’s injuries. Rankin’s defense sought a competency evaluation, citing concerns about mental health. Those arguments are defense positions and do not resolve the factual allegations in the indictment.

The grand jury’s conspiracy charges give the prosecution a case that extends beyond proving who delivered the injury that caused William’s death. Prosecutors allege that the three defendants agreed to criminal conduct and took steps toward carrying it out. The Signal messages and audio communication cited in charging documents may therefore become important evidence as attorneys litigate what each person knew, intended and allegedly did. The existence of a communication alone does not establish the prosecution’s interpretation of it, and the defense will have an opportunity to challenge both the evidence and the conclusions prosecutors draw from it.

The competency rulings for Rankin and Keaney remove one preliminary question but leave the central issues unresolved. A finding of competency simply allows the prosecution to proceed. The defendants continue to be presumed innocent unless they are convicted, and each has entered a not-guilty plea to the expanded indictment. The court has not yet publicly resolved the competing accounts of individual responsibility offered by prosecutors and defense attorneys.

The case remains pending in Hamilton County Common Pleas Court. Prosecutors continue to rely on medical findings, investigative testimony and electronic communications as they prepare their case, while defense lawyers are expected to contest how those facts apply to each defendant. The next stages will determine what evidence can be presented and whether the state can prove the 13 charges beyond a reasonable doubt.

Author note: Last updated September 21, 2026.