A custody dispute case in Orange County Family Court is giving the public a rare early look into the federal investigation of the cruise ship murder of 18-year-old Anna Kepner. Kepner’s body was discovered aboard the Carnival Horizon cruise ship under a bed in a cabin, wrapped in a blanket and covered by life vests. The FBI is conducting an active murder investigation. Key investigative facts that would not normally be available to the media, such as who the suspect is, and how far along the investigation may be. They emerged after family court documents in a custody case identified a 16-year-old minor as the murder suspect in the case.
Fox 35 News interviewed Orlando criminal defense attorney and television legal analyst Jose Rivas to explain the legal complications surrounding this case—specifically how jurisdiction works when federal criminal investigations intersect with family court proceedings, what a gag order really means, and how courts attempt to protect children while pursuing justice.
The Jurisdictional Challenge: When Federal Law Supersedes Family Court
When a death occurs aboard a cruise ship in international waters involving American citizens, the matter immediately falls under federal jurisdiction. “Family law is not going to tell criminal law,” Rivas said. “One does not overwrite the other. Above all of that, it’s federal court, which obviously supersedes any of those other courts.”
The Cruise Vessel Security and Safety Act mandates that cruise lines report suspicious deaths to federal authorities, giving the FBI authority to investigate crimes committed aboard ships, regardless of where the ship is flagged or registered. In the Kepner case, the ship had already left international waters and returned to Miami when authorities discovered evidence suggesting foul play. However, because the death occurred at sea, federal prosecutors have the authority to pursue charges in federal court.
This creates an unusual situation in the Kepner cruise ship murder case. Simultaneously, an unrelated family court custody dispute is occurring in Orange County, Florida involving members of the family. The stepmother has filed motions in family court, and Kepner’s father has been subpoenaed to appear at a custody hearing scheduled for December 5. These two court systems—one focused on family law and one focused on federal crimes—are operating in parallel, sometimes generating information that affects the other.
“We cannot use family law court to hinder a criminal investigation, especially a federal investigation by the FBI,” Rivas said. “The judge is going to be very cautious as to what restrictions she actually places on this.”
Carnival Cruise Ship Murder Investigation: Understanding Gag Orders
The stepmother has filed a motion requesting a gag order in the family court case, asking that judges restrict media and public access to family court documents. She argued that continued media coverage and public disclosure of court filings could cause “potential irreversible harm” to the family and might compromise the FBI’s investigation or defense strategies of the accused.
A gag order is a court order that restricts certain people from discussing or disclosing information about a case. In family court proceedings, judges can impose gag orders to protect the privacy and welfare of minor children involved in custody disputes. The order would prohibit the press and the public from accessing documents or attending certain court hearings.
However, constitutional law imposes strict limits on gag orders. Such orders must be narrowly tailored and represent the least speech-restrictive means available to protect a compelling government interest. Courts have held that gag orders on the press are far more difficult to justify than gag orders restricting statements by trial participants, attorneys, or parties directly involved in litigation.
“This motion is about process and confidentiality,” Rivas said. “When we talk about family law court, we’re talking about family. We’re talking about the best interests of the children and what they’re asking the court is to protect them.”
Yet Rivas raised an important distinction: restricting family court documents to protect one minor’s privacy differs significantly from preventing the public from learning about facts relevant to a federal murder investigation, as in the cruise ship murder case.
“There’s a difference between protecting a child and hindering a criminal investigation,” Rivas said. “Just because there’s a criminal investigation doesn’t necessarily mean you have to put a gag order in and restrict the information that would usually be allowed for public access.”
According to Rivas, one option the family could pursue instead of requesting a gag order would be to pause the custody dispute entirely. “If the family wants to stop information from being released, they should pause the custody battle,” Rivas suggested. “You could postpone it, sit until the criminal cruise ship murder investigation is resolved.”
The Best Interest of the Child Standard in a Criminal Context
Family law courts apply the “best interest of the child” standard when making custody decisions. This doctrine requires judges to consider numerous factors when determining what arrangement would best serve a child’s health, safety, emotional well-being, and overall welfare. Judges examine whether parents have been primary caregivers, whether they have histories of crime or violence, the stability of the home environment, and numerous other considerations.
The complication in the Kepner case is that the minor in question is not simply a custody dispute subject. According to court documents, the 16-year-old is a suspect in a federal homicide investigation. This creates a tension between family law’s protective principles and criminal justice’s investigative and prosecutorial needs.
“The law says a 16-year-old is still a minor and that’s going to be a big concern,” Rivas said. “The judge is going to want to make sure that minor is well protected, particularly if there’s an investigation.”
How These Legal Concepts Intersect
The Kepner case illustrates how three distinct legal concepts—federal jurisdiction, gag orders, and the best interest of the child—can create conflicting pressures within the judicial system.
Federal courts have primary authority over the criminal investigation occurring in international waters. Family courts have authority over custody and welfare matters. When a family court gag order might restrict information related to a federal investigation, the federal government’s interests typically take precedence.
Similarly, while protecting a minor’s privacy is important, courts cannot use family law proceedings to obstruct federal criminal investigations. A gag order issued in family court cannot bind the federal government or prevent federal prosecutors from conducting their investigation and pursuing charges.
The Critical Importance of Legal Representation
For anyone involved in complex cases like the cruise ship murder case where multiple court systems intersect—whether as a family member, a witness, or a person under investigation—understanding these jurisdictional and procedural issues becomes critical.
“Sometimes the truth doesn’t matter,” Rivas said. “What matters is what you can prove. And sometimes you’ll see that in a lot of cases where the prosecution will come and say, ‘Listen, we’re not going to file any charges. We just don’t have enough to move forward.'”
An experienced criminal defense attorney who understands both family law and federal criminal procedures like those involved in the cruise ship murder case can help protect a person’s rights while courts navigate these competing interests. From the moment an investigation begins, having skilled legal representation can make the difference in achieving a favorable outcome in either court system.
Orlando Criminal Defense Attorney Jose Rivas is a veteran bilingual TV Legal Analyst who has appeared on Univision, Fox News, Telemundo, and many other news outlets.