A newly released court transcript has shed additional light on allegations surrounding the death of 18-year-old Anna Kepner, revealing claims that months before the fatal incident aboard a cruise ship, her teenage stepbrother allegedly attempted to climb into her bed while she was asleep.

The allegation surfaced during testimony presented at a pretrial detention hearing involving 16-year-old Timothy Hudson, who faces charges of first-degree murder and aggravated sexual abuse in connection with Kepner’s death. Hudson has pleaded not guilty to all charges.

The case has attracted widespread attention due to the unusual circumstances surrounding the crime, the family relationship between the accused and the victim, and the complex questions investigators continue to examine as they prepare for trial.

According to federal authorities, Kepner disappeared while traveling with her family aboard a weeklong Carnival cruise. Investigators later discovered her body hidden beneath her bed inside the cabin she had shared with several family members.

Court documents indicate that her body was wrapped in a blanket and concealed under the bed, with additional objects reportedly positioned nearby in what prosecutors believe was an attempt to disguise its presence.

As the investigation progressed, authorities began reviewing not only events that occurred aboard the cruise ship but also interactions that allegedly took place months earlier.

One of the most significant revelations emerged from statements made by Kepner’s former boyfriend.

During testimony presented by FBI Special Agent Andrew Delvalle, investigators described information they received from the ex-boyfriend regarding an incident he claimed to have witnessed during a late-night FaceTime call.

According to the testimony, the former couple frequently remained connected through video calls while sleeping.

On one particular occasion, Kepner had reportedly fallen asleep while the call remained active.

Her boyfriend was still awake and working elsewhere when he allegedly noticed unusual activity on the screen.

Investigators said the witness reported hearing sounds coming from Kepner’s room.

When he looked more closely, he claimed he observed Hudson attempting to get into bed with her while she was asleep.

The alleged witness described being shocked by what he saw.

According to investigators, he immediately yelled through the phone, causing Hudson to leave the room.

The former boyfriend later informed authorities that he discussed the incident with Kepner afterward.

The conversation reportedly left a lasting impression on both of them.

According to testimony, Kepner was reluctant to formally report the matter to her father despite being informed of what allegedly happened.

Investigators stated that she described feeling uncomfortable around Hudson and expressed concerns about his behavior.

Court records indicate that she allegedly viewed him as “a little weird” and was reportedly uneasy because he possessed numerous knives.

While these statements remain part of the investigative record rather than proven facts, prosecutors have pointed to them as potentially relevant in understanding the relationship dynamics between the two teenagers prior to the cruise.

The alleged incident was never formally documented at the time.

Kepner’s father reportedly informed investigators that surveillance cameras existed within the family home.

However, because the alleged event occurred months earlier, any potential footage had already been erased through the system’s automatic deletion process.

As a result, investigators were unable to independently verify the account through video evidence.

The lack of physical evidence surrounding the allegation has become one of several areas of dispute in the case.

Defense attorneys have repeatedly emphasized what they describe as gaps and unanswered questions in the government’s investigation.

At previous hearings, Hudson’s legal team challenged several aspects of the prosecution’s theory.

Attorneys argued that investigators may be drawing conclusions based on assumptions rather than definitive evidence.

They have also questioned certain interpretations of forensic findings and witness statements.

One particularly contentious issue involves DNA evidence.

According to prosecutors, samples collected during a sexual assault examination matched Hudson’s DNA.

The government argues that this evidence supports allegations of aggravated sexual abuse.

The defense, however, has suggested alternative interpretations.

At earlier proceedings, attorneys argued that any sexual contact may not necessarily support the prosecution’s characterization of events.

Their arguments have generated significant debate among legal observers following the case.

Adding further complexity is the fact that multiple individuals were reportedly present in or around the cabin during portions of the cruise.

Defense attorneys have emphasized that investigators have not established a precise timeline identifying exactly when the fatal attack occurred.

Prosecutors believe Kepner was killed during a window of approximately sixteen hours but acknowledge that determining a more exact time of death has proven difficult.

The uncertainty surrounding that timeline remains one of the central issues likely to be explored at trial.

Despite these challenges, prosecutors insist the evidence against Hudson is compelling.

Government attorneys have described the killing as deliberate and calculated.

According to courtroom testimony, surveillance footage allegedly places Hudson alone with Kepner inside the cabin for an extended period prior to her disappearance.

Prosecutors argue that this evidence, when combined with forensic findings and witness statements, creates a clear picture of what occurred.

The defense strongly disagrees.

Attorney Eric Cohen has repeatedly argued that investigators have failed to eliminate alternative possibilities.

Speaking during court proceedings, he suggested that significant questions remain unanswered and warned against relying on assumptions to fill gaps in the evidence.

His remarks underscore the sharply contrasting narratives that are expected to dominate future courtroom battles.

Beyond the legal arguments, the case has sparked broader discussions about family relationships, privacy and warning signs that may go unnoticed within households.

Some observers have focused on the allegations involving the prior bedroom incident, questioning whether earlier intervention could have altered later events.

Others caution against drawing conclusions from allegations that remain disputed and largely unverified.

Legal analysts note that such claims often become highly influential in public opinion despite not always being supported by independent evidence.

For investigators, the challenge lies in separating emotional reactions from facts that can be established through testimony, forensic analysis and corroborating evidence.

The release of the hearing transcript has only intensified public interest.

Online discussions and media coverage have focused heavily on the alleged FaceTime incident, with many viewers expressing shock at the account described during testimony.

At the same time, others have urged caution, emphasizing that allegations presented during pretrial proceedings should not be treated as proven facts.

The court process remains ongoing.

Hudson continues to maintain his innocence and has entered a not-guilty plea.

In a development that surprised some observers, the judge ultimately declined prosecutors’ request to keep him detained pending trial.

Instead, the court ruled that he could remain in the custody of a maternal uncle under specific conditions.

That decision generated mixed reactions from the public and from legal commentators.

Supporters of the ruling noted that pretrial release does not reflect a determination of guilt or innocence.

Critics questioned whether the seriousness of the allegations warranted a different outcome.

As preparations for trial continue, numerous questions remain unresolved.

Investigators are still piecing together the final timeline of events aboard the cruise ship.

Attorneys on both sides continue reviewing evidence.

Witness credibility, forensic findings and competing interpretations of key events are expected to become major focal points during future proceedings.

For now, the death of Anna Kepner remains at the center of a case marked by tragedy, conflicting accounts and intense public scrutiny.

Whether the allegations regarding earlier incidents ultimately prove relevant to the prosecution’s case will likely be determined in court.

Until then, the newly disclosed testimony has added another layer of complexity to an already deeply disturbing investigation—one that continues to raise difficult questions about trust, family relationships and what may have occurred behind closed doors long before the events that brought the case into the national spotlight.