UT - Parenting influencer, Ruby Franke, and blogger/podcast partner Jodi Hildebrandt, arrested for Child Abuse, Aug 2023 #2

this suit by Kevin

He isn't suing as parent and next friend on behalf of the abused children. He is suing in his OWN name on behalf of himself and hoping to also cash in on what was done to his children. The children are not in his custody but the states so IMO he should have no right to sue on their behalf!

I also note there is some malarky in paragraphs 15 and 16 about how because of the severity torture/abuse the children weren't placed into his care but into the state's because they need specialized assistance and services. It further, through how it is worded, implies he was a part of the decision to have the state swoop in and assist with those supportive services.

This guy has big brass cajons MOO. He not only wants damages/money for what Jodi put him through but for what she put his children through. While I agree the kids should get all sorts of damages, what gives him the right to sue for his own emotional damage the torture of this absentee father's children suffered???

I can't wait to see what @gitana1 thinks about this newest development

' Kester, Kevin Franke’s attorney, told PEOPLE of the lawsuit: "We filed suit against Jodi Hildenbrandt. Couldn't file for the kids yet because the State still has their legal custody, but filed in an effort to preserve Hildebrandt's wealth and assets until appropriate action can be taken to make the kids whole."

 
' Kester, Kevin Franke’s attorney, told PEOPLE of the lawsuit: "We filed suit against Jodi Hildenbrandt. Couldn't file for the kids yet because the State still has their legal custody, but filed in an effort to preserve Hildebrandt's wealth and assets until appropriate action can be taken to make the kids whole."

umm except the state has already gotten an order entered to make sure to hold some of her money back for the kids' benefit. :rolleyes: and makes one hell of a presumption that Kevin will get his kids back. But sure, lets make this suit about Kevin's suffering due to what happened to his kids. Who he abandoned a year prior. okey dokey. I was trying to hold some space for Kevin in hopes he wasn't the lackluster human I thought him but this seals it for me. No more grace for him. not from me.
 
umm except the state has already gotten an order entered to make sure to hold some of her money back for the kids' benefit. :rolleyes: and makes one hell of a presumption that Kevin will get his kids back. But sure, lets make this suit about Kevin's suffering due to what happened to his kids. Who he abandoned a year prior. okey dokey. I was trying to hold some space for Kevin in hopes he wasn't the lackluster human I thought him but this seals it for me. No more grace for him. not from me.

Bad dad

Kids entitled to money

wave magic wand....

Good dad
 
Thanks for the update.
I haven't read it yet.
Abandons his kids and now considers himself entitled to damages? LOL

Lawsuit.
IMO:
Kevin must think that everyone is as stupid as he is to believe his claims about why he doesn't have custody of his 4 children.
It's been 7.5 months since the state took custody and he can't even get back the 2 middle girls.

Notice how Kevin was removed as a player in this nightmare and actually thinks his kids came from a healthy, happy home?

Page 5 & 6

"15. As a result of the foregoing, the State of Utah, through the Department of Child andFamily Services, took custody of all four of the Plaintiff’s children in order to address,professionally, the emotional and psychological condition of the children, which had been so seriously and adversely manipulated and indoctrinated.

The children are residing in separate homes while in State’s custody.16. The children’s personalities, emotions and psyches were so damaged and altered that it was beyond Father’s capability to restore them without professional intervention of State’s resources through the Juvenile Court. This, through a rehabilitation and restorative process directed and prescribed by the professionals treating the children.
In order to restore his children to his care in their family home, Father himself, has complied with the Court process and has affirmatively sought his own regimen of professional therapy, in order to coordinate not only with the children’s treatment providers, but to gain an understanding of his children’s conditions and needs, and how to best facilitate the restoration of all of his children back to their former status as happy and healthy individuals and of a happy and intact family in their family home.17.

The intentional and/or negligent acts of the Defendant have completely damaged andaltered, for the worse, Kevin’s marriage (the children’s mother is in prison), all of hischildren’s individual psyches, personalities and behaviors; essentially dismantling,exploding his family and his personal life."
 
umm except the state has already gotten an order entered to make sure to hold some of her money back for the kids' benefit. :rolleyes: and makes one hell of a presumption that Kevin will get his kids back. But sure, lets make this suit about Kevin's suffering due to what happened to his kids. Who he abandoned a year prior. okey dokey. I was trying to hold some space for Kevin in hopes he wasn't the lackluster human I thought him but this seals it for me. No more grace for him. not from me.
Besides the state IIRC: there's other suits against Jodi since the arrest.
Two husbands who with wives went to Jodi,both are now divorced.?
 
The suit refers to Ruby as his "then wife". Has the divorce been finalized?
Probably not,it hasn't even been 5 months yet and we don't know if RF is in agreement.

The real Kevin Franke. (scream)
"incident" ? (1000 screams)

"Randy also added that Kevin didn’t initially want to divorce, and instead, he hoped his family could heal from the incident. However, the situation seems to have changed."

 
Last edited:
this suit by Kevin

He isn't suing as parent and next friend on behalf of the abused children. He is suing in his OWN name on behalf of himself and hoping to also cash in on what was done to his children. The children are not in his custody but the states so IMO he should have no right to sue on their behalf!

I also note there is some malarky in paragraphs 15 and 16 about how because of the severity torture/abuse the children weren't placed into his care but into the state's because they need specialized assistance and services. It further, through how it is worded, implies he was a part of the decision to have the state swoop in and assist with those supportive services.

This guy has big brass cajons MOO. He not only wants damages/money for what Jodi put him through but for what she put his children through. While I agree the kids should get all sorts of damages, what gives him the right to sue for his own emotional damage the torture of this absentee father's children suffered???

I can't wait to see what @gitana1 thinks about this newest development
What’s going on with this?

He’s suing?

I absolutely loathe the guy. He was a despicable person long before this, IMO.
 
Jesse @ Law & Crime goes over KF's lawsuit against JH point by point.

He does so without any criticism of the despicable excuse for the man/father/Christian.

That role was covered in the comments and the consensus about KF is ugly, and rightfully so,


Scroll down for comments.
1,686 Comments

 
Paige Hanna put out a 2nd video, Jesse @ Sidebar and Brian from the news channel that does great reporting on the case go over it.
Paige still hasn't addressed KF's claim that according to him Jodi lived with them for 6 weeks, stabbed and cut herself and tried to seduce Johnny Hanna.According to Jodi the Hannas kidnapped her.
I don't know much about Paige and did watch her 1st video which I found self-serving and disingenuous.
I would guess that most, if not all of you, know the Hanna's story and involvement.
I'll look for Paige's 2nd video and if found post it.


 
Last edited:
I disagree.
Kevin said he was desperate to get Ruby back and would take advice from anyone to get her back.
That's not being brainwashed, that's a guy that moved out and ignored his children for over a year on the advice of a mad woman because he only cared about himself and what he wanted which was Ruby.
For years Kevin was well aware of Ruby's beliefs and ways of disciplining and had no problem with it.
His children were always a footnote.

My opinion still remains that if Ruby had taken Kevin back and the torture and abuse which led to the arrest of R & J began and to stay with her he very well could have taken part in abusing his children or not abuse them himself but was well aware of R & J's abuse and remained silent and didn't try and stop them aka the "enabler".
Had he done otherwise it would have been bye-bye Kev....again!
IMO there's a detail that lies between my stated opinion and yours here that's sort of a middle ground.

I truly believe Kevin has been brainwashed. Every sign points to me that way, and his experience is entirely compatible with the effects of brainwashing. Plus, we know this is a Jodi-tactic.
However, that doesn't mean that Kevin wasn't a knowing participant in an abusive household before he got into Jodi's clutches. And I agree that he enabled Ruby's behavior. But that doesn't mean he wasn't subsequently brainwashed.

And, yes, he privileged Ruby over his kids (I partly blame his religious convictions for this, aka "commitment to his marriage"), which shouldn't have happened in a context where they were being abused. But this aspect of his character doesn't mean he wasn't also brainwashed. IMO humans are complicated.

As an aside, I'm all of a sudden thinking "commitment to a marriage" is not something I would personally embrace as a life goal. I would much rather be around a person who is committed to the people in his/her life as a real thing rather than oriented around a construct. This would include children and significant others.
If Kevin had felt committed to the people in his life rather than the abstract institution of marriage as the "be all and end all", perhaps he'd look a lot more benign. But if he's all "I gotta be a great husband" (which is how Jodi got him by the short and curlies—she and Ruby kept telling him he wasn't), then he's not "I've got to be the best person I can be" as a life practice with everyone. Privileging an institution over people-hood made him vacant and prey to evil others, as well as personally irresponsible. It let him ignore his kids, and perhaps others in his life: it made him absent from everything. Which to me, is exactly how he comes across. He's a guy who's not THERE.
I guess there's no parallel sacrament to the institution of marriage that calls for obligation to your children. Being a sperm donor is not a sacrament. Too bad.

FWIW, for all the talk of "commitment to marriage", none of this cast of characters had it. Big fail.
 
Last edited:
“The report that I saw said that they went to their home, nobody would answer the door," District 67 Rep. Christine Watkins said. "So, there was never anyone that had eyes on those kids once they forced the father out of the home.”

Watkins is co-chair of the Child Welfare Legislative Oversight Panel, which oversees the Utah Division of Child and Family Services. In June, the panel will meet with DCFS officials, and Watkins said she expects them to talk specifically about the Franke/Hildebrandt case for hours.
Utah lawmakers question DCFS response time in Franke child abuse case
 
“The report that I saw said that they went to their home, nobody would answer the door," District 67 Rep. Christine Watkins said. "So, there was never anyone that had eyes on those kids once they forced the father out of the home.”

Watkins is co-chair of the Child Welfare Legislative Oversight Panel, which oversees the Utah Division of Child and Family Services. In June, the panel will meet with DCFS officials, and Watkins said she expects them to talk specifically about the Franke/Hildebrandt case for hours.
Utah lawmakers question DCFS response time in Franke child abuse case
IMO:
It sounds to me like Watkins gave all agencies involved a possible pass when she should have said that it's more then likely that because of the Franke's notoriety /LDS they were given a pass from the get-go so no investigation follow-up needed.

September 8,2023

Rep. Christine Watkins, a chair of the panel, said Friday that she is aware of the Franke case through news reports and is planning to follow up with DCFS with her own questions about what occurred.

“I had concerns when I heard about the case. Not only were neighbors calling, but older siblings were calling, too,” she added. “It sounds like those kids were in pretty bad shape. And it’s certainly something we have the right to call DCFS out on to know what might have gone wrong.”

She also questioned whether Franke’s status as a well-known YouTube vlogger and the outward appearance she presented about her family may have influenced any child welfare investigations.

“If someone has the resources, they can cover up, they can disguise a lot of things,” Watkins said. “Even when kids go to court, kids can be told not to say anything. They can be intimidated by the situation.”

 
I'm not referring to the Franke's neighbors.

I've yet to see evidence besides her daughter Shari that any of Ruby's family/friends contacted LE/child services expressing concern for the children's welfare.
Ruby's sisters have said they tried for years, tried what?
Paige Hanna did a "wow is me" on her 2 recent videos.
 

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
90
Guests online
3,855
Total visitors
3,945

Forum statistics

Threads
594,000
Messages
17,997,254
Members
229,295
Latest member
drena519
Back
Top