Kentucky - Judge killed, sheriff arrested in Letcher County courthouse shooting - Sep. 19, 2024 # 2

[raja]

In regards to “they” are taking my daughter or wife it is possible that “they” refer to the judge and the other lady’s phone that was taken by LE. I wonder if she is a friend of the sheriffs wife.

 

[Chimera]

In regards to “they” are taking my daughter or wife it is possible that “they” refer to the judge and the other lady’s phone that was taken by LE. I wonder if she is a friend of the sheriffs wife.

Possibly ?
Like a small community where everyone seemingly knows each other's business.
Omo.

 

[worm]

In regards to “they” are taking my daughter or wife it is possible that “they” refer to the judge and the other lady’s phone that was taken by LE. I wonder if she is a friend of the sheriffs wife.

I’m just guessing but from what I took with the investigator in court, the lady who had the other phone “wasn’t sworn” so likely an administrative employee in the sheriff’s office?

 

[Parsnip]

In regards to “they” are taking my daughter or wife it is possible that “they” refer to the judge and the other lady’s phone that was taken by LE. I wonder if she is a friend of the sheriffs wife.

Or maybe the judge and his wife? Just speculation

 

[less0305]

My biggest question is how does a deputy have such unfettered access to a judge's chambers to be inside in the middle of the night and early morning hours? This seems completely unusual to me.

 

[tlcya]

My biggest question is how does a deputy have such unfettered access to a judge's chambers to be inside in the middle of the night and early morning hours? This seems completely unusual to me.

Ben Fields, as Mullins' court bailiff, was in charge of security for the courthouse. This would mean keys, alarm codes, complete unfettered access to al areas of the courthouse IMO. If anyone saw him going into or out of the building after hours I imagine they never gave it a second thought, thinking, he must be doing something in his official capacity.

 

[Parsnip]

My biggest question is how does a deputy have such unfettered access to a judge's chambers to be inside in the middle of the night and early morning hours? This seems completely unusual to me.

Not unusual at all, ime. The Sheriff’s department protects the courthouse. They have access to all of the rooms, as well as video footage.

 

[less0305]

Ben Fields, as Mullins' court bailiff, was in charge of security for the courthouse. This would mean keys, alarm codes, complete unfettered access to al areas of the courthouse IMO. If anyone saw him going into or out of the building after hours I imagine they never gave it a second thought, thinking, he must be doing something in his official capacity.

Somewhat agree, but when a deputy takes a woman into a judge's chambers during off court hours - who assisted or gave the deputy access and, from what I read, this one woman was not the only one? I just find all that odd. I don't see the Sheriff giving access, but I do wonder what the Judge knew.

 

[Dotta]

If anyone saw him going into or out of the building after hours I imagine they never gave it a second thought, thinking, he must be doing something in his official capacity.

Phew!
They might have even applauded him
for seemingly doing "overtime"

Cough, cough

JMO

 

[tlcya]

Somewhat agree, but when a deputy takes a woman into a judge's chambers during off court hours - who assisted or gave the deputy access and, from what I read, this one woman was not the only one? I just find all that odd. I don't see the Sheriff giving access, but I do wonder what the Judge knew.

But why would someone need to give him access? Would the fox need a key to the henhouse if he was the one hired to "secure" said henhouse? No, he already has them as part of his job.

Which is why Stines was being sued civilly. Because he hired and was the direct supervisor of Fields (the fox).

 

[less0305]

Not unusual at all, ime. The Sheriff’s department protects the courthouse. They have access to all of the rooms, as well as video footage.

I understand the sheriff's department protects the courthouse, but there are protected areas within that building that deputies just don't have unfettered access to. Much like a judge wouldn't have access to an evidence room at the law enforcement agency. Sorry, but having court clerk friends and working in law enforcement, judge's offices are usually no access. In our agencies the only other person who had a key to the chief's office was the city clerk. My long-time court clerk friend is the only person other than the judge's who has keys to those offices. Just my info and opinion. But I'm not here to argue. I just think there is something more sinister going on and, even though I agree the Sheriff should have never shot the Judge and I do agree he should go to jail - but I want the whole truth to come out.

 

[Parsnip]

My long-time court clerk friend is the only person other than the judge's who has keys to those offices

YMMV. Ime, the sheriff’s department (and the deputies who protect our local courthouse) have access to all of the courtrooms, chambers, jury rooms, and interior halls.

 

[Soulmagent]

The 40 pounds thing is curious, but also is reporting from a single source without much context. It’s not clear, for instance, if the sheriff may have been exaggerating for effect and someone at the paper decided to turn it into something it’s not. 40lbs is a significant weight loss and should be fairly noticeable. His diet is almost certainly much more restrictive than it would be outside of jail and it doesn’t look like he’s lost a significant amount of weight since being arrested.

I’m just not really sure how much reality there is to the weight loss claim, is what I’m trying to say.

JMO

They say when people make life style changes it is often met with resistance of you friends family and peers. He needed to lose the 40 lbs if he did lose it. Not like he is a chicken bone or anything.

 

[Soulmagent]

I am personally more concerned with the smearing of the judge that began almost immediately on the web fueled by gossip and rumor that thus far has been completely unsubstantiated. The accused has an attorney to look out for his interests. The victim is the only truly defenseless individual in that regard as he cannot refute the insinuations made against him after his death. JMO MOO

We (public) aren't being denied anything. IMO it's a time place thing. A preliminary hearing is not the place to trot out all the evidence and arguments about what that evidence means. It is simply is there enough evidence to move this up the chain to the grand jury to see if they will indict on murder charges.

We will eventually get to hear the killer's side of things and see the entirety of the visual footage from the chambers.

It was a probable cause hearing. He has not been indicted .

 

[tlcya]

It was a probable cause hearing.

and the judge found probable cause. <modsnip>

 

[m00c0w]

But why would someone need to give him access? Would the fox need a key to the henhouse if he was the one hired to "secure" said henhouse? No, he already has them as part of his job.

Which is why Stines was being sued civilly. Because he hired and was the direct supervisor of Fields (the fox).

Technically, Stines was being sued as the sheriff and “Unknown supervisors of Ben Fields” were the John Does listed in the lawsuit. It’s, imo, a pretty typical strategy to include the supervisors to try and get the county to fork over money because it’s fairly reasonable to assume Fields doesn’t have the type of compensation being sought. Even if the supervisors weren’t necessarily at fault by any reasonable means, there’s a high likelihood of settling the lawsuit for a decent amount of money.

This is not to say that I think her lawsuit is frivolous; far from it. The attorney is just strategizing to get their client the best compensation possible.

JMO

 

[tlcya]

thread correctness? maybe I dunno I just post here.

Sorry, didn't mean to be abrupt or short but I tend to use both terms interchangeably to describe the following:

A preliminary hearing, also called a “probable cause hearing,” is an adversarial proceeding conducted by a judge or magistrate (and not a jury) to determine if the prosecution has enough evidence to go to trial.The hearing is limited to the specific issue at hand, in which both sides present evidence and arguments regarding the disputed issue of fact or law. The judge does not give a verdict on whether the defendant is guilty.
preliminary hearing

 

[less0305]

and the judge found probable cause. Your point?

And the judge had his mind made up evidenced by the fact that he said the hearing was over, and almost stood up to leave when the defense attorney politely asked the judge was he not going to hear arguments. The judge laughed, "oh yeah, you want to make an argument? By all means, go ahead." The defense did make an argument - not that the sheriff should be excused and sent free, but that the snippet of the video did not include what led up to the shooting and it, in his opinion, was not first degree, but rather a lesser degree. Judge quickly stated his decision to go forward with first degree and closed the hearing.

 

[Auntie Cipation]

In terms of the speculations that the wife and daughter might have turned to the judge for help in a divorce/dv type situation:

I really wonder if they would have been likely to turn to one of MS's closest friends -- wouldn't they have worried the judge might clue MS in to their plans?

It seems more likely to me they would have turned to the other law enforcement system in town -- the Whitesburg, KY city police department.

I'm sure in a small town where everyone knows everyone, there are strong connections between the city police dept. and the county sheriff's office, but if the judge and sheriff were really that close buddies, the city police would seem (to me) a more neutral place to turn for help.

This makes me think it's less about DV/divorce and more about something personal with the judge and the daughter.

MOO

 

[less0305]

Technically, Stines was being sued as the sheriff and “Unknown supervisors of Ben Fields” were the John Does listed in the lawsuit. It’s, imo, a pretty typical strategy to include the supervisors to try and get the county to fork over money because it’s fairly reasonable to assume Fields doesn’t have the type of compensation being sought. Even if the supervisors weren’t necessarily at fault by any reasonable means, there’s a high likelihood of settling the lawsuit for a decent amount of money.

This is not to say that I think her lawsuit is frivolous; far from it. The attorney is just strategizing to get their client the best compensation possible.

JMO

Yes, absolutely. Almost all of those lawsuits are filed against the city or county and they name individuals such as the offending party and the sheriff or police chief - they will argue the employee wasn't properly trained and usually win on that very issue because once they drag into court all the training records, it shows that a lot of agencies don't have enough funds to train every employee annually in every scenario that can possibly occur. Cities and counties generally settle the lawsuit. Most, if not all, agencies have insurance companies and the settlements are generally paid by the insurance.