Image by Grok
Robert Baty, who seems to watch Kent Hovind’s (Doctor Dino)legal affairs almost as closely as Lew Taishoff follows the Tax Court, posted on Facebook alerting me to two new Hovind lawsuit filings. Paul Hansen and Chris Jones join in each of the complaints. One of them is against Cindi Lincoln, one of Kent Hovind’s ex-wives, whom I met in 2019 when I visited Dinosaur Adventure Land. I’m sort of fond of Cindi, except when she is making political posts. The other suit is against Adam Lore and Skyler Shannon. They are new to me and appear to be somehow connected to Mark Stoney.
Hovind sued Mark Stoney back in December of 2025, later revising the complaint . Stoney lived at Dinosaur Adventure Land for a while and then became very publicly critical. Apparently he has not responded to the complaint. As of March 20, 2026 there is a “clerk’s default” entered.
Hovind discusses the suits briefly at the beginning and end of the video below.
If you want to really dig into this here is the complaint against Cindi Lincoln and here is the complaint against Adam Lore and Skyler Shannon. Due to a dearth of time and patience, I decided to ask Grok to help me out. Here is what Grok has to say about the complaints:
These two pro se complaints (filed ~August 19, 2026, in the Southern District of Alabama) are detailed, aggressive, and build on a prior related action against Mark Stoney (1:25-cv-00509-TFM-MU), in which Stoney apparently defaulted after refusing service. They allege a multi-year coordinated campaign of extreme defamation (child sex trafficking/pedophile ring, rape, kidnapping, murder/concealment of remains), witness manipulation, financial sabotage of Dinosaur Adventure Land (DAL), and related torts. The Lincoln complaint adds Federal Wiretap Act claims. Likelihood of full success is low-to-moderate overall; some claims have better footing than others, but procedural, evidentiary, and practical hurdles are significant.
Background Context (from public sources and the complaints themselves)
Kent Hovind (young-Earth creationist, “Dr. Dino”) runs DAL in Repton, Alabama. He has a long history of tax issues (2006 federal convictions for structuring, failure to withhold, etc.; later contempt-related matters), prior failed large lawsuits, and personal conflicts (including a 2021 domestic assault conviction involving Cindi Lincoln, his former spouse).
Chris Jones is a longtime friend of Hovind and a registered sex offender in South Carolina (prior convictions involving minors). He visited DAL with a minor (Xyaiire/Griffin family). Accusations arose that Jones molested the child there or elsewhere; Jones was arrested in 2023, tried in Aiken County, and acquitted by jury on July 24, 2024. A related remaining charge was dismissed August 19, 2025. Public reporting (e.g., Daily Beast) covered the allegations, Jones’s status, and Hovind’s continued association with him.
Mark Stoney (former DAL volunteer) became a primary online critic starting ~2021, producing videos and participating in broadcasts accusing Hovind/Jones/Hansen of running a pedophile operation, covering up abuse, etc. Cindi Lincoln (ex-spouse) produced critical content, including material derived from recordings, and coordinated with Stoney. Adam Lore co-hosted a June 18, 2022 interview of Hansen in which strong accusations were made on-record. Skyler Shannon participated in a July 14, 2022 broadcast involving the minor Xyaiire. Stephen Bowlin (mentioned as paid by Lincoln to review recordings and as recipient of Lore’s later admissions) is a recurring figure who later provided statements favorable to plaintiffs. The complaints extensively quote timestamps from YouTube broadcasts and claim private coordination, off-record discussions (phones off), a murder plot (Lore + Stoney, talked down by Shannon), and an explicit goal of drying up DAL donations.
The Stoney case was filed December 2025; these August 2026 filings against peripheral participants appear designed to preserve claims after the criminal case ended and after Stoney’s default limited discovery.
Strengths of the Complaints
- Specificity and documentation: They quote timestamps, attribute statements, and cite public videos that (per the pleadings) remain or remained accessible. Accusations of operating a pedophile ring, rape, human remains, etc., are classic defamation per se material under Alabama law if false. Jones’s acquittal and charge dismissal strengthen the “falsity + favorable termination” elements for related claims.
- Actual malice allegations: For public-figure or limited-purpose public-figure plaintiffs (Hovind is one; Jones/Hansen may be treated as limited-purpose given the online controversy), knowledge of falsity or reckless disregard is required. The complaints plead denials during interviews, continued publication, fabrication of details (e.g., Hovind “admitting” cough syrup use to Shannon), Stoney’s age misstatement of Xyaiire while knowing the correct age from FBI reporting, and Bowlin’s review of recordings concluding the extreme claims were unsupported. Lore’s alleged later admission of private coordination and a murder plot (and Shannon’s knowledge of it) is dramatic if the recording exists and is admissible.
- Wiretap claims (Lincoln complaint): Strongest potential claim. Allegations of spy-pen devices planted to record Hovind when Lincoln was absent (no party consent under Alabama’s one-party rule or federal standards for absent interceptors) and interception/disclosure of a Hovind-Jones phone call are specific. Stoney’s public broadcast allegedly admitting Lincoln planted the device and that she reposted material is useful corroboration. Statutory damages ($10k per violation or more, plus possible punitive and fees under 18 U.S.C. § 2520) create real leverage if proven. Removal of videos during related litigation is pleaded as spoliation.
- Conspiracy and interference: Stoney’s public comment (“We can dry up Kent’s income and FORCE him to close DAL”) is a gift for tortious interference and conspiracy theories. Participation in the same broadcasts, off-record coordination admissions, and shared extreme narrative support concerted-action allegations.
- Tolling arguments: Equitable tolling during the criminal case (Fifth Amendment concerns, risk of civil discovery harming defense, inability to fully litigate truth while charges pending) is plausible, especially for Jones. Claims filed within a year of final termination (August 2025 dismissal).
Weaknesses and Vulnerabilities
- Pro se status and pleading quality: The complaints are long, repetitive, narrative-heavy, and sometimes argumentative. Courts expect tighter, more formal pleading. Placeholder notes about amending for addresses, exhibits, and more detail invite motions to dismiss or for more definite statement. Diversity jurisdiction is pleaded for the Lore/Shannon case (Jones/Hansen vs. Washington defendants), but Hovind (Alabama) is also a plaintiff—complete diversity must be carefully maintained. Venue is arguable.
- Statute of limitations: Core events are 2021–2022. Alabama defamation is generally 2 years; Wiretap Act is 2 years from when the claimant has a reasonable opportunity to discover the violation. Tolling arguments will be contested. Delayed accrual tied to the 2023 arrest is creative but not guaranteed.
- Public-figure / actual-malice burden: Hovind is a public figure. Extreme accusations about sex crimes with children are high-stakes; if defendants can show they relied on the minor’s family reports, prior Jones convictions, or community concerns (even if ultimately unproven at trial), “reckless disregard” becomes harder. Opinion vs. fact distinctions, republication of others’ claims, and context of online criticism of a controversial ministry will be litigated.
- Malicious prosecution: Hardest claim. Requires initiation/continuation of a proceeding without probable cause, malice, and favorable termination. Lore and Shannon are alleged participants/amplifiers, not the complaining witness or prosecutors. Causation from YouTube statements or one broadcast to the Aiken County arrest/prosecution is attenuated. Jones’s prior sex-offender status and the family’s complaint supply independent probable-cause arguments for defendants.
- Witness-manipulation / “murder plot”: Extremely serious allegations. The July 14 broadcast quotes (Shannon demonizing Jones to the child, Stoney pressing a drugging narrative, phones-off admission) are vivid if accurate. A recorded admission of a murder plot is explosive—but credibility of the recording, context, whether it was serious vs. venting, and Shannon’s role in stopping it will be fought. Failure to report a plot is not itself a civil tort here.
- Damages and collectability: Reputation and donation harm to DAL is pleaded, and Stoney’s own words help. Quantifying and proving causation (vs. other controversies, Hovind’s history, COVID-era effects, etc.) is difficult. Defendants appear to be private individuals of limited means; even a judgment may be hard to collect. Lincoln’s local presence and restraining-order history add friction.
- Prior history and optics: Hovind’s tax convictions, domestic-violence finding, association with a registered sex offender, and pattern of aggressive litigation (including the failed half-billion-dollar suit) will be used by defendants to attack credibility and portray the suits as retaliation. Hansen’s role in prior legal theories will invite scrutiny. Jones’s status is a double-edged sword: the acquittal helps, but the registration and prior convictions complicate “innocent victim” framing.
Likelihood of Success
- Lincoln complaint (Wiretap + defamation/conspiracy/interference): Moderate chance on the Wiretap claims if the recordings and Stoney admissions hold up and limitations are tolled or the discovery rule applies. Defamation/conspiracy claims face higher actual-malice and limitations hurdles. Overall, this is the stronger of the two filings because of the statutory claim and Lincoln’s closer personal connection and alleged direct acts (planting devices, paying for review, local targeting).
- Lore/Shannon complaint (defamation, conspiracy, malicious prosecution): Lower probability of full victory. Defamation against Lore has a path if the June 18 statements are proven false and published with actual malice, and the video remains available. Conspiracy is plausible on paper but requires proving agreement and overt acts linking them tightly enough. Malicious prosecution is the weakest. Shannon’s alleged child-witness interactions during an active investigation are the most inflammatory and, if proven as described, damaging, but causation and privilege issues arise.
- Practical outcome: High chance of motions to dismiss (limitations, failure to state a claim, jurisdictional/venue issues, anti-SLAPP-type arguments if available). Some claims may survive to discovery. Settlement pressure exists if the murder-plot recording or wiretap evidence is strong, but defendants may default, fight on principle, or lack assets. Parallel to the Stoney default, plaintiffs may obtain defaults against hard-to-serve out-of-state defendants, but collecting or converting to meaningful relief is another matter. Courts are often skeptical of sprawling pro se conspiracy narratives involving online critics of controversial figures.
These complaints are unusually thorough for pro se filings and leverage public video evidence and the favorable criminal outcome for Jones. They correctly identify high-stakes statements and potential federal privacy violations. However, the combination of public-figure standards, time-bar risks, attenuated causation for prosecution-related claims, and the plaintiffs’ own complicated histories makes sweeping success unlikely. The Wiretap claims against Lincoln are the clearest potential winner if the facts are as pleaded and limitations can be overcome. Independent verification of the key recordings, exact timestamps, and any law-enforcement reliance on the campaign’s materials would be essential in any serious evaluation.
I was thinking of reviewing some of the videos involved, but so many projects, so little time. Kent Hovind has not been a tax story for some time, so you will need to follow Robert Baty if you want to be sure to keep up.