ADEL, Iowa (Court TV) — Prosecutors in the case of a woman accused of killing a real estate agent have filed documents defending a key witness in their murder case, describing the witness as “consistent and credible” despite the defense’s claims that the witness’s story has changed.
Kristin Ramsey cries as her mother testifies during a bond hearing on April 10, 2026. (Court TV)
Kristin Ramsey, 53, has pleaded not guilty to first-degree murder in the shooting death of Ashley Okland. Ramsey, who was arrested 15 years after the victim was killed, has maintained her innocence and challenged the account of an alleged eyewitness to the crime.
Okland, who worked as a real estate agent, was at an open house when she was killed on April 8, 2011. She was found alone in the model home she was showing; there was no sign of a struggle. Investigators said they found two spent .380-caliber casings at the scene.
Charges in the case weren’t filed until 2026, though Ramsey was identified as a suspect early on in the investigation, prosecutors have said.
In a motion to dismiss, Ramsey’s defense argued that the sole eyewitness to the crime, identified only as “neighbor” in court documents, changed her story once investigators told her that she was a “prime suspect” in their investigation. At that point, the defense claims, the neighbor said she saw Ramsey immediately after hearing gunshots, rather than seeing her several minutes later as she had initially reported.
“Contrary to the defendant’s characterization, the testimony of the neighbor identified in the motion was consistent and credible,” prosecutors said in a new filing defending their witness. “The defendant’s principal arguments concern the credibility of witnesses, alleged inconsistencies in prior statements and competing interpretations of the evidence. Those are factual matters for the jury, not grounds for pretrial dismissal.”
The brief filing also notes that prosecutors plan to file a supplement that will address Ramsey’s claims “in greater detail.”
Ramsey’s defense separately filed a motion to seal the documents it was submitting as exhibits to support its motion to dismiss the murder charge. Prosecutors also opposed that, saying, “The defendant’s publicly filed motion already describes the substance of the exhibits in considerable detail. Sealing the exhibits would therefore do little to prevent the dissemination of the information the defendant has already placed in the public record.”
A judge did not immediately schedule a hearing to address the issue.