Ava Washington’s father was moved from her care after allegations involving a recording, hygiene complaints and a pending felony charge.
ELIZABETHTOWN, Ky. — An elderly Kentucky man with dementia was placed in state care after his daughter was accused of striking him and neglecting his basic needs, prosecutors said.
The daughter, Ava Washington, 47, is charged in Hardin County with wanton abuse or neglect of an adult. The case began when Washington’s husband contacted the Hardin County Sheriff’s Office on Oct. 2, 2025, and said he had evidence that Washington had abused her father. The father’s move into state care is the clearest immediate outcome in a case that now heads toward an Oct. 13 trial.
Hardin County Assistant Commonwealth’s Attorney Teresa Logsdon said the father was placed in the care of the state after the allegations surfaced. Public reports do not identify the agency, location or type of placement. They also do not say whether the move followed an emergency protective action, a court order or an administrative decision by adult protection officials. What is clear from the reported court account is that Washington no longer has the same caregiving control she had when the alleged incident occurred.
The state’s version of events focuses first on a video. According to accounts of the arrest citation, Washington’s husband told deputies that he recorded abuse inside the home. The recording showed the father sitting on the edge of a bed and trying to put on clothes. Washington allegedly entered, yelled at him and struck him in the groin area with the back of her hand. Authorities say she kept yelling and struck him two more times in the same area. The reports do not state whether the father spoke during the recording, whether he cried out, or whether any injury was visible on camera.
The allegations did not end with the recorded incident. Logsdon said there were other complaints about the father’s condition while in Washington’s care. She said he had been found in feces and urine, had feces under his fingernails, and was eating with his hands. The phrase about eating with his hands became one of the most striking details in public accounts of the case, but prosecutors described it as part of a broader picture of poor caregiving. Logsdon said Washington believes the allegations may have been made for retaliatory reasons, but the prosecutor said the caregiving in the case was not good.
Washington’s attorney has disputed the strength of the case. He said Washington has a very solid chance of being found not guilty. He also said she dealt with health problems while she was in the Hardin County Detention Center. The public record described in reports does not state whether the defense has filed a motion tied to her health, whether she sought medical release, or whether her condition affected court scheduling. Those details remain outside the public accounts now available.
The father’s dementia may shape nearly every stage of the case. It is the reason authorities described him as vulnerable, and it may affect how prosecutors prove what happened. A person with dementia may need help with dressing, eating, hygiene and daily routines, depending on the condition’s severity. Public reports, however, do not give the father’s age, diagnosis date or level of impairment. That leaves unanswered whether he can testify, whether he gave any statement to investigators, and how much of the case will depend on other witnesses and records.
Washington was arrested in December by the Hardin County Sheriff’s Office. Local reporting at the time said she was lodged in the Hardin County Detention Center on a $5,000 cash bond. Later reporting said she had been released from the detention center days before the April account of the case. Jail records reviewed by the outlet identified the pending charge as wanton abuse or neglect of an adult. The case’s movement from arrest to release to trial date suggests the matter is in the ordinary pretrial stage, with no public report of a plea or dismissal.
Kentucky law classifies wanton abuse or neglect of an adult as a Class D felony. That legal label matters because it separates the case from lesser claims of reckless conduct and from more serious allegations of knowing abuse or neglect. Prosecutors must meet the charged standard in court. The defense is not required to prove Washington’s innocence. The burden remains on the commonwealth to prove the charge beyond a reasonable doubt if the case is tried before a jury.
The home setting also matters. Many adult protection cases involve care in private spaces where police, social workers and neighbors may see only fragments of what is happening. Here, prosecutors have a recording provided by a family member, plus reported complaints about hygiene and care. The defense may ask whether those complaints were verified, who made them, how often the father was checked, and what Washington’s husband may have seen or done before contacting deputies. The public reports do not say whether anyone else lived in the home or helped provide care.
The case carries two tracks of consequence. One is protective, focused on where the father lives and who is responsible for his care now. The other is criminal, focused on Washington’s conduct and the felony charge against her. Those tracks can overlap, but they answer different questions. The father’s state placement may reduce the immediate risk alleged by prosecutors. It does not decide whether Washington committed a crime. That decision remains with the court process.
As of May 20, the father is reported to be in state care, Washington is out of jail, and the Oct. 13 trial date remains the next known milestone. The public record still leaves major questions about medical evidence, witness testimony and the full contents of the recording.
Author note: Last updated May 20, 2026.