A former guitarist for one of America’s most prominent rock bands is accused of deliberately driving a car into the 79-year-old father of his former bandmate.

But before a jury can decide whether Brady Ebert committed attempted murder, a Maryland court must answer a different question: Is he competent to stand trial?

Ebert, 33, a former guitarist and founding member of Grammy-winning hardcore band Turnstile, has been charged in connection with a March 29 incident in Silver Spring, Maryland, involving William Yates, the father of Turnstile singer Brendan Yates.

Prosecutors allege Ebert intentionally struck the elder Yates with his vehicle, seriously injuring him. Ebert has denied criminal wrongdoing and has maintained that he acted in self-defense.

Now, months after his arrest, the case has taken an unexpected procedural turn. During a Sept. 3 court hearing, Ebert threatened to fire his own attorney, while his lawyer told the judge he had “significant concerns regarding competency.” Circuit Judge Eric Johnson subsequently ordered Ebert to undergo a formal competency evaluation before the attempted-murder prosecution can move forward.

The result leaves two major questions hanging over the case.

What actually happened between Ebert and William Yates on March 29?

And will Ebert be found legally capable of participating in his own defense?

Prosecutors Say Ebert Drove at Yates Deliberately

According to charging documents described by local and national media, authorities say Ebert encountered William Yates near his Silver Spring home on March 29.

Prosecutors allege that Ebert honked his horn, shouted obscenities and then drove his vehicle into Yates.

The impact left the 79-year-old with severe injuries to his lower body, according to authorities. Police have alleged that after Yates was injured and on the ground, Ebert returned and told him that he “deserved it” before leaving the area.

The accusations eventually resulted in a series of serious felony charges.

Reports on the case say Ebert has faced attempted first-degree murder, attempted second-degree murder, first-degree assault and two counts of second-degree assault. The first-degree attempted-murder charge carries the possibility of life imprisonment if Ebert is convicted.

Ebert, however, has consistently disputed the state’s account.

“This is pure self-defense,” he previously told a district court commissioner, according to reports.

He has also said, “I did not commit a crime.”

Those statements set up the central factual dispute that prosecutors and the defense would eventually be expected to present to a jury: whether Ebert deliberately targeted Yates, as authorities allege, or whether his actions occurred in circumstances that legally justified self-defense.

For now, neither version has been established at trial.

The Turnstile Connection Gives the Case an Unusual Backdrop

The criminal case has drawn considerable attention because Ebert was once a central figure in Turnstile.

Ebert and Brendan Yates were longtime friends and helped form the Baltimore hardcore band in 2010. Ebert played guitar on the group’s early records and remained with Turnstile through its major breakthrough, including the 2021 album Glow On.

That record transformed Turnstile from a respected hardcore act into an internationally recognized rock band.

The group later won Grammy Awards and became one of the highest-profile bands to emerge from the modern American hardcore scene.

But Ebert left Turnstile in 2022.

Following his arrest this year, Turnstile publicly addressed his departure in unusually direct terms. The band said it had separated from Ebert after what it described as a continuing pattern of harmful behavior and escalating threats.

Those are Turnstile’s allegations and characterization of the relationship; they are separate from the criminal charges now before the Maryland court.

William Yates reportedly told investigators that Ebert had caused problems for his family following the split from the band.

That history could provide context for prosecutors’ theory of the March confrontation, although the court will ultimately determine which evidence can be presented and how much weight jurors may give it.

Then the Case Took a Turn in Court

The most unexpected development came not from new physical evidence but from Ebert’s own defense team.

At a Sept. 3 hearing in Montgomery County Circuit Court, defense attorney Mark Sobel told Judge Johnson that he had significant concerns about whether Ebert was competent to participate in the legal proceedings.

Ebert strongly objected.

He told the court that he was “perfectly competent” and said that “every part of the police report is a lie.”

He also said he intended to fire Sobel, reportedly because he suspected his lawyer was working with prosecutors against him.

The disagreement placed the judge in an unusual position.

A criminal defendant may insist that he understands the case and is capable of defending himself, but once legitimate concerns about competency are raised, a court may require a professional evaluation before allowing the prosecution to continue.

Judge Johnson ordered that evaluation.

Ebert has been held without bail at the Montgomery County Correctional Facility in Boyds, Maryland, according to reports.

What Does “Competent to Stand Trial” Mean?

A competency evaluation does not decide whether Ebert committed the alleged crime.

It also does not determine whether he has a psychiatric diagnosis or whether he was responsible for his actions at the time of the March incident.

Instead, the question is focused on the present.

Generally, courts must determine whether a defendant understands the nature of the proceedings against him and is capable of assisting attorneys in preparing a defense.

That distinction is important because competency to stand trial is separate from guilt, innocence or an insanity defense.

If Ebert is found competent, the prosecution can continue toward trial.

If he is found incompetent, the case could be temporarily suspended while additional legal and medical proceedings determine whether competency can be restored.

A status hearing has been scheduled for Sept. 22, when the court is expected to review the issue. Reports have indicated that the trial had been scheduled for early October, although that timetable now depends on the competency process.

Two Questions Now Define the Case

Until the competency issue arose, the case appeared likely to revolve primarily around the events on the road outside William Yates’ home.

Prosecutors say Ebert chased down and intentionally struck a 79-year-old man with his car.

Ebert says he acted in self-defense and insists the police account is false.

Those competing narratives remain unresolved.

But the Sept. 3 hearing added another layer that must be settled first.

Before prosecutors can attempt to prove that Ebert intended to kill William Yates, the court must determine whether Ebert can understand the charges, work with counsel and meaningfully participate in a trial.

The evaluation could therefore decide not whether Ebert is guilty, but when — and under what circumstances — a jury will ever hear the evidence against him.

For Turnstile fans, the case is an extraordinary collision between the history of a celebrated rock band and a serious criminal prosecution involving the family of its frontman.

For William Yates, however, it concerns an alleged attack that left him badly injured.

And for Ebert, who continues to deny the allegations, the immediate legal battle is no longer only about what happened on March 29.

Before the court can decide what he did, it first has to determine whether he is legally able to stand trial for it.