Law&Crime Sidebar - OJ Simpson’s Lawyer Breaks Down Best Defense for Ruby Franke in Child Abuse Case

Episode Date: September 20, 2023

Ruby Franke was arrested and charged with six counts of aggravated child abuse after her 12-year-old son escaped from her business partner’s remote Utah home in August. The YouTube mom remains locked up as her attorneys dive deep into massive troves of alleged evidence against her. O.J. Simpson "dream team" lawyer Alan Dershowitz breaks down Franke’s best defense with the Law&Crime Network’s Angenette Levy.PLEASE SUPPORT THE SHOW:Follow THIS IS ACTUALLY HAPPENING on the Wondery app or wherever you get your podcasts, and you can listen to THIS IS ACTUALLY HAPPENING ad free on Wondery Plus.LAW&CRIME SIDEBAR PRODUCTION:YouTube Management - Bobby SzokePodcasting - Sam GoldbergScript Writing - Savannah WilliamsonVideo Editing - Michael DeiningerGuest Booking - Alyssa Fisher & Diane KayeSocial Media Management - Vanessa Bein & Kiera BronsonSUBSCRIBE TO OUR OTHER PODCASTS:Court JunkieThey Walk Among AmericaDevil In The DormThe Disturbing TruthSpeaking FreelyLAW&CRIME NETWORK SOCIAL MEDIA:Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/lawandcrime/Twitter: https://twitter.com/LawCrimeNetworkFacebook: https://www.facebook.com/lawandcrimeTwitch: https://www.twitch.tv/lawandcrimenetworkTikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@lawandcrimeSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Wonderly Plus subscribers can binge all episodes of this Law and Crimes series ad-free right now. Join Wonderly Plus in the Wondery app Apple Podcasts or Spotify. Agent Nate Russo returns in Oracle 3, Murder at the Grandview, the latest installment of the gripping Audible Original series. When a reunion at an abandoned island hotel turns deadly, Russo must untangle accident from murder. But beware, something sinister lurks in the grand. View Shadows. Joshua Jackson delivers a bone-chilling performance in this supernatural thriller that

will keep you on the edge of your seat. Don't let your fears take hold of you as you dive into this addictive series. Love thrillers with a paranormal twist? The entire Oracle trilogy is available on Audible. Listen now on Audible. I don't like feeling pain. I do not go around looking for ways to bring pain into my life. And if I stay in the reality, there are going to be inherent discomforts. Ruby Frankie, the YouTuber accused of abusing her children, along with her business partner, remains in jail. How might she defend herself? One of O.J. Simpson's former lawyers is here to explain. Welcome to Law and Crime's Sidebar podcast. I'm Anjanette Levy.

Ruby Frankie faces six felony counts of child abuse involving her children. Her business partner and friend, therapist Jody Hildebrandt, faces the same charges. Both are being held with that. bail at this point, and we've learned Hildebrandt has surrendered her license with the state pending the outcome of this case. A spokesperson for the state of Utah said Hilda Brant surrendered her license through her lawyer. The alleged abuse came to light last month after one of Frankie's children climbed out of a window at Hilda Brant's home in Utah and went to a neighbor for help. The boy had duct tape on his ankles and wrist and appeared malnourished. Frankie's five minor children are now in protective custody, their father, Kevin, is trying to get custody of the children.

His lawyer told law and crime that he and Ruby were separated for 14 months and that he was not aware of the abuse. Neighbors have told a number of news outlets that they reached out to children's services with concerns about the Frankie Kids many times over the years. A spokesperson for the Division of Child and Family Services tells law and crime, the agency affirms recent law enforcement reports of our involvement in the Frankie case. But the agency said to protect its relationships with those it serves and out of respect for children and families, DCFS will not offer specific information about the case either past or present. Questions have also been raised about whether Utah's free-range parenting laws prevented DCFS from taking action sooner. A DCFS spokesperson said

every referral to the agency goes through a screening process and each complaint is handled individually. A CPS investigation for non-supervision is open, the agency says, when the information reported includes a specific occurrence or allegation that a child is subjected to an unreasonable risk of accidental harm due to a failure to supervise a child's activities. The DCFS spokesperson says free-range parenting laws do not absolve parents from supervising their children, but allow them to teach children independence and resilience. What if your partner developed 21 new identities, or you discovered that your friend who helped you through your darkest times was actually a conniving con artist? Or what if you began

seeing demons everywhere, inhabiting people, including your son? What would you do? From Wondry, this is actually happening as a podcast that brings you extraordinary true stories of life-changing events told by the people who live them. In their newest season, you'll hear even more intimate first-person accounts of how regular people have overcome remarkable circumstances. From the man who went to jail for 17 years for accidentally shooting the person who tried to save his life, to one of the close friends of infamous scam artist Amanda Riley. These haunting accounts sound like Hollywood movies, but I assure you, this is actually happening. Follow this is actually happening on the Wondry app or wherever you get your

podcast and you can listen to this is actually happening. Add free on Wondry Plus. Joining me to discuss how Ruby Frankie could maybe best defend herself in court is somebody who's spent a lot of time in courtrooms over the years. He is Professor Alan Dershowitz. He is also the author of the new book, Get Trump, The Threat to Our Civil Liberties, Due Process, and Our Constance. Constitutional rule of law. Professor Dershowitz, welcome back to Sidebar. Thanks for coming on. Thanks. It's a pleasure to be on with you. Yeah, we just we always love having you and getting your insight. Your thoughts on this case about Ruby Frankie. This is somebody who was on YouTube for years posting videos of her children. Now she's charged with felony child abuse along with her business partner Jody Hildebrandt who is a therapist. It's a very hard defense to make. I mean, he's The argument has to be that how parents deal with their children, particularly under the local law, is a matter of degree and that there's a tremendous amount of discretion given to parents as to what the best method of raising their children is.

And we don't want the state to go too deeply into family affairs and intrude, on the other hand, obviously. There are the rights of children who can't really defend themselves and can't articulate some claims that they have. And criminal law should never be a matter of degree. It should always be an on-off switch. It should always be a clear line. I think it was Thomas Jefferson who once said that for a criminal law to be valid, it has to be so clear that a reasonable person should be able to understand that if he reads it while running, Imagine the image. He's running. He's reading the law, and he has to be able to understand it.

And so the ex post facto law of the Constitution and due process all require clear, clear warning, clear notification. Whenever there are ambiguities under the principle of lenity, the ambiguities have to be resolved in favor of the defendant. But that's always going to be a matter of degree. And if you have a case where there is clear, obvious, knowing abuse, that defense is less likely to work. We have allegations here that a child and maybe even two children were duct taped at the ankles and wrists. Food and water were withheld as some form of, I don't know if you would call it punishment. I don't know if you find this to be some way of teaching people therapeutically. I can't even imagine any therapist saying, yes, withhold food and water from a child in order to

counsel them. These are her children who were found in her business partner's home. The police apparently say they have videos of Ruby Frankie in the home while this was going on. So I don't I don't understand how anybody could say that duct taping children at the wrists and ankles is anything but abusive and along with withholding food and water. Who could have imagined back when I was a kid, I just turned 85, so we're talking about almost a century ago, parents would wash out their children's mouths with soap if they said a dirty word. They would beat them up, smack them. I got smacked by my rabbi in Hebrew school for questioning the Torah. Those today are utterly unacceptable. I'm not suggesting that what is

alleged here even fits on any continuum, all I'm suggesting is to the modern eye and ear, things that are clearly abusive would not have seemed abusive back then, which is why you need absolute clarity. Also, there are different cultural norms for how you treat children, different religious groups, different ethnic groups, different ideological groups, treat that children somewhat differently. So there is a need, for the future at least, there is a need for clear guidance and statutes that say, you know, you can't restrain your children or deny them food. On the other hand, you can deny them dessert. Everybody would acknowledge that. You can deny them a double portion. And so what the criminal law doesn't like is matters

of degree and yet when it comes to issues like this they're always going to be matters of degree and matters of different attitudes by different groups of people there is a religious aspect to this these are both Mormon women Jody Hildebrandt and Ruby Frankie and we are in no way saying that you know the Mormon church is saying you should be duct-tapping your children that's not the point here however we do have somebody Ruby Frankie who who seems to claim that she is a devout Mormon who is concerned about things going on in the lives of her children

that could be viewed as sinful. And possibly she goes to Jody Hildebrandt for help because she's a licensed counselor. And the counselor says, well, this is what we need to do. This is what needs to be done to cure these ills, whatever they may be. We still don't know what the alleged transgressions

were. So is it possible her lawyer says she was under the spell of this woman who claimed to be a therapist and was trying to do what was best for her children because she believed something was going on with them that was harmful. Look, this is a variation of advice of counsel defense. What she's claiming is advice of therapist defense or advice of religious leaders' defense. Let's not forget how old the notion of spare the rod and spoil the child or under the law of the Bible. If a child reaches a certain level of disobedience, the child could be stoned that's in the Bible. Nobody accepts that today. But it'd be interesting to see how a jury in this part of the country reacts to the claim of advice of counselor,

advice of religious leaders, advice of friends, it's very likely the jury will find that, notwithstanding any of those defenses, this went too far. But remember, the state has to prove that beyond a reasonable doubt. And all they need is one juror to have a reasonable doubt and you have a hung jury. We've seen some reporting in the Salt Lake City Tribune that there were neighbors who said they contacted children's services about this. They were very concerned about potential harm that the children were enduring at the hands of Ruby Frankie. And these neighbors told the reporter at the Tribune that they felt like their complaints were ignored or fell on death ears. And they've got this free range parenting law out there in Utah where parents have,

you know, wide discretion. I mean, you're supposed to be able to parent your children, right? I mean, You should have broad discretion in how you want your children to be reared. Duck taping really goes a little far with that. But, you know, it's not a little far. It goes way too far. But, you know, they felt that their children were not the victims of neglect when they investigated these claims. We have these statements here from the Division of Child and Family Services in which

they say they took these complaints, they evaluated them, things of that nature. So does a law like this free-range parenting law not empower a children's services agency to take more action? Well, it does, and it requires the striking of an appropriate balance. I'll never forget the time I was a law clerk in Washington. I would take the bus to work every day, and I heard two people speaking, I overheard them speaking. They were both child care people, and one of them said, what do you do when the kid yells? And one says, well, I smack them. And the other one said, no, there's a better way of doing it.

I put his head in the oven for a couple of seconds, and that makes sure that he stops crying. I immediately called child services when I heard about that. And they did nothing. And I don't know what happened. I don't know what the result was. There are terrible things out there. Look, think about people in history who have killed their children to protect them from worse things happening, probably the most famous person in modern history, was Joseph Gerbils,

the head of the Nazi information group. When he saw that the war was over, he and his wife poisoned their six children to spare them, a world without Hitler. Now, nobody, nobody would justify anything like that. But the range of human attitudes toward children ranges from the horrors of Joseph Goebbels to a parent who might lose temper for a second and take out the strap and hit their child. Today, that would be regarded as abusive. So what we need are clear laws with clear lines prohibiting certain kinds of conduct, but even that won't solve all the problems because there are so many ways of abusing children that are not capable of being to find. The interesting thing about this case, of course, is the history in the background

of the accused and the degree of alleged abuse and the evidence, which is what makes this case so fascinating for so many Americans to watch and to see how a jury will assess the competing claims of the state to protect the children versus the right of the free-range parenting to do it they think is best. You know, none of us really knows what's best for our children. I mean, those of us who have been lucky enough to raise kids who have not been subject to these kinds of problems have to feel great compassion for parents who've tried their best and their kids turn out to be drug addicts or whatever. And it's awfully hard to find the precise line where the state should have the power to intrude into what is the most intimate of family relationships, the parent-child relationship.

It's such a complex issue. I do want to read part of the comment here from the Children's Services Agency. They said free-range parenting laws do not absolve parents from supervising their children but are intended to allow parents to teach their children independence and resilience, how they see fit based on the child's age and maturity. That doesn't tell us very much. I don't know what it means, essentially. It means you have to strike the appropriate balance and put the children's welfare first.

We all agree with that, but it doesn't give us the kind of lines that we need to separate bad parenting from criminal parenting. So bottom line, Professor Dershowitz, how does Ruby Frankie justify this in a court of law or defend herself? I mean, it seems if there is video evidence supporting that she was there and she, she was aware of the treatment that her children were receiving, then she's in deep trouble. Well, there are two ways of defending in a case like this. One is to dispute the facts. And if you dispute the facts and you turn out to be wrong, the jury will not like you because the jury can see the facts with their own eyes. The other is to take a different tact and say, look, I did these things. I did it in the best interest of the children. Maybe.

People disagree with me. Maybe I was wrong, but they're my children. I had the right to make a decision to bring them up in the way I thought was best for them. You know, they're both uphill defenses, but a good lawyer has to decide essentially between those defenses. Now, the lawyer could do both. I'd say, look, I disagree. She didn't really do this, that, or the other thing, but even if she did, she did it in the best interest of the child. Look at the intent. tent, don't look at the result. Look at what was in the mind of the parent and see and ask yourself, can you really sit in judgment of her from so far away and with such different attitudes? You know, that's probably the best you can do. That doesn't mean you're going to succeed.

Look, as we know, over 90% of trials, criminal trials, result in conviction. So you start out with a strong presumption that there will be a conviction in any case, and particularly a case as high profile and as disturbing as this one. So the possibility, of course, is some kind of a plea bargain. And that really is something we're not in a position to assess. Well, Professor Alan Dershowitz, thanks as always for coming on to talk with us. It's always a great conversation. We appreciate it. And again, the new book by Professor Dershowitz is Get Trump, The Threat to Civil Liberties, due process, and our constitutional rule of law. Again, thank you so much.

Thank you so much. That's it for this edition of Law and Crime Sidebar podcast. You can listen to and download Sidebar on Apple, Spotify, Google, and wherever else you get your podcasts. And of course, you can always watch it on Law and Crimes YouTube channel. Just remember to hit the subscribe button. And don't forget, Jesse Weber and I, will be in Orlando at CrimeCon this Friday. Stop by and see us at the Law and Crime Table. We will also be doing a live taping of Sidebar about the Gilgo Beach serial killer case. So don't miss that 9 a.m. on Friday morning at CrimeCon. I'm Anjanette Levy and we will see you next time. binge all episodes of this long crime series, ad free right now on Wondery Plus. Join Wondery Plus in the Wondery app, Apple Podcasts, or Spotify.