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

[AugustWest]

yes, it is clear that is what the defense attorney was angling for in the PC/Prelim hearing. He plans to shoot for a reduction of the charge of murder to manslaughter. I don't think he got what he was hoping for at the hearing. But he has put that term out there so we know that is his defense plan at this time.

A question for you, I am not terribly familiar with the grand jury process. I know the prosecutor will present the facts behind their wish to pursue murder charge. Does the defense attorney also get to present evidence to the GJ to support why he believes the appropriate charge would be manslaughter at that time?

I'm not proficient in Kentucky law, so don't take this as gospel!

I quickly scanned the procedure for Kentucky grand juries. They include a provision for allowing a defendant to present evidence. See:

Rule RCr 5.08 - Evidence for defendant, Ky. R. Crim. P. RCr 5.08 | Casetext Search + Citator

Read Rule RCr 5.08 - Evidence for defendant, Ky. R. Crim. P. RCr 5.08, see flags on bad law, and search Casetext’s comprehensive legal database

casetext.com

They also, however, have a conflicting rule that limits who can be in the presence of the grand jury. See:

Rule RCr 5.18 - Presence of other persons with grand jury, Ky. R. Crim. P. RCr 5.18 | Casetext Search + Citator

Read Rule RCr 5.18 - Presence of other persons with grand jury, Ky. R. Crim. P. RCr 5.18, see flags on bad law, and search Casetext’s comprehensive legal database

casetext.com

I'm not sure how they reconcile the two rules. Kentucky probably does somehow through case law. So I think general rule is no defense evidence, exception found in the first rule quoted above.

ETA: you found it!

 

[Ontario Mom]

Maybe it's just me, and maybe I'm way too old fashioned but as a mom of 6 girls I find it highly inappropriate for a grown, married man to have a teenage girl's phone number that he isn't related to, or isn't an employee of his. In this case, neither applies.

Now if it turns out her number wasn't actually stored as a contact but only on the phone because her dad dialed it immediately prior to shooting Mullins, that's a different story. And yet, her number was still dialed immediately prior so it's pretty obvious she's connected in some awful way to what her dad did.

jmo

 

[Friday Fan]

Deleted. Question answered about KY grand juries.

However, in federal grand juries the accused is rarely called. Framework for GJs are covered by the US Constitution.

And a legal website "find law" made it clear defense attorneys and judges are not allowed when the prosecutor is presenting evidence.

Although the defendant could possibly testify in KY, I don't think it's too common, unless they're subpoenaed.

No judge, public defender, or criminal defense attorney is in the grand jury room when the prosecutor is presenting evidence. The prosecutor explains the law to the jury and works with them to gather evidence and hear witness testimony.https://www.findlaw.com/criminal/criminal-procedure/how-does-a-grand-jury-work.html

 

[iamshadow21]

Maybe it's just me, and maybe I'm way too old fashioned but as a mom of 6 girls I find it highly inappropriate for a grown, married man to have a teenage girl's phone number that he isn't related to, or isn't an employee of his. In this case, neither applies.

Now if it turns out her number wasn't actually stored as a contact but only on the phone because her dad dialed it immediately prior to shooting Mullins, that's a different story. And yet, her number was still dialed immediately prior so it's pretty obvious she's connected in some awful way to what her dad did.

jmo

Do we know if they were part of the same church? Because people who are part of the same church or community groups sometimes have each other's numbers for perfectly innocent practical reasons.

MOO

 

[tlcya]

I'm not proficient in Kentucky law, so don't take this as gospel!

I quickly scanned the procedure for Kentucky grand juries. They include a provision for allowing a defendant to present evidence. See:

Rule RCr 5.08 - Evidence for defendant, Ky. R. Crim. P. RCr 5.08 | Casetext Search + Citator

Read Rule RCr 5.08 - Evidence for defendant, Ky. R. Crim. P. RCr 5.08, see flags on bad law, and search Casetext’s comprehensive legal database

casetext.com

They also, however, have a conflicting rule that limits who can be in the presence of the grand jury. See:

Rule RCr 5.18 - Presence of other persons with grand jury, Ky. R. Crim. P. RCr 5.18 | Casetext Search + Citator

Read Rule RCr 5.18 - Presence of other persons with grand jury, Ky. R. Crim. P. RCr 5.18, see flags on bad law, and search Casetext’s comprehensive legal database

casetext.com

I'm not sure how they reconcile the two rules. Kentucky probably does somehow through case law. So I think general rule is no defense evidence, exception found in the first rule quoted above.

ETA: you found it!

So basically, Stines may request to present evidence or testimony before the GJ, but it is up to them if they elect to allow him to. And no defense attorney would be allowed to be present while he did so if he is allowed to. But the GJ has subpoena power and the commonwealth attorney assists the GJ in getting the witnesses they want to hear from on the stand.

With that being the case, the defense attorney by putting the questions he did to the investigator during cross at the hearing has opened the door and planted the seed for potential grand jurors to subpoena the daughter, who is a minor at 17, so her mom could accompany her but that is it, no attorneys for the defendant or any witnesses called can be present.

I am thinking the odds are high that LS gets called before the GJ so they can ask her about the phone calls etc. MOO

 

[Friday Fan]

The chambers do look bigger now that we see this whole view of it, but still look so temporary somehow, especially, because if I recall, the courthouse itself is very nicely done, nicer than many of us expected for such a small town courthouse, according to comments I remember reading on the video when the interior courtroom was first shown. Compared to the nicer courthouse, the chambers don't look like much, like not much thought went into the decoration or interior design (or lack of it).

I just had a thought. Could it be possible that this chambers we see in the video really is just a temporary room, because his actual chambers are sealed off at the moment, due to having been the scene of the crime in what is still, I believe, an ongoing investigation? That might make sense, but I still doubt it. I think it just looks like their interior design budget was spent mostly on the parts of the courthouse that more people (the public citizens) would see.

It's such a small county with only 25,000 residents. My local Justice of the Peace Court serves 500,000 residents! We have four JP courts in each quadrant of the county with a population 2 million.

My JP court is in a rinky dinky strip mall next to a dollar store. The building also houses the constable and the deputy constables. I have no idea what our local JP judge's chamber looks like, but considering the facility that it's housed in, I would not expect spartan facilities!

The JP court handles small claims, code compliance, disputes, tenant-landlord issues, evictions etc

Letcher County is a very small county population wise.

 

[AugustWest]

So basically, Stines may request to present evidence or testimony before the GJ, but it is up to them if they elect to allow him to. And no defense attorney would be allowed to be present while he did so if he is allowed to. But the GJ has subpoena power and the commonwealth attorney assists the GJ in getting the witnesses they want to hear from on the stand.

With that being the case, the defense attorney by putting the questions he did to the investigator during cross at the hearing has opened the door and planted the seed for potential grand jurors to subpoena the daughter, who is a minor at 17, so her mom could accompany her but that is it, no attorneys for the defendant or any witnesses called can be present.

I am thinking the odds are high that LS gets called before the GJ so they can ask her about the phone calls etc. MOO

Possibly. But remember, heat of passion (aka "extreme emotional disturbance") is not an absolute defense to a crime, but rather a mitigating factor. Which means, if a defendant uses such, they are essentially admitting the crime, then using heat of passion to lower severity. Heat of passion is a substitute for malice, which as you know is an element of the crime of murder. The argument about malice is for the trial phase, not a preliminary hearing or during a grand jury, the functional equivalent of a prelim. Prosecutor just needs to show he is able to provide evidence of each element of the crime, and it doesn't need to be beyond a reasonable doubt.

 

[bestill]

I served on our county grand jury and we never heard anything from the defense side. It was basically the state (in most cases local LE) presenting what lead to the arrest and we then decided if there was enough for it to go to trial. Has this case been moved out of Letcher county for the grand jury? What may still be interesting is how many jurors will have to recuse themselves because they are connected to the parties involved. JMO

 

[Friday Fan]

Maybe it's just me, and maybe I'm way too old fashioned but as a mom of 6 girls I find it highly inappropriate for a grown, married man to have a teenage girl's phone number that he isn't related to, or isn't an employee of his. In this case, neither applies.


jmo

It is unusual. But Stines accused the judge of "trying to kidnap his wife and daughter" after shooting him, AND shooting him five times to assure that he was dead. Surely if the judge was involved in something like this why would Stines silence him? Keep in mind that Stines is law enforcement, not some vigilante parent. He also was afforded the privilege to access the judge's chamber because of his position as sheriff. The judge trusted him.

Some random angry parent would not have been invited in the judge's chamber.

Heck, why didn't the sheriff just arrest the judge instead of killing him?

Yeah, I know the sheriff would have needed an arrest warrant, but heck. At least he wouldn't be facing murder charges and would have "exposed" whatever his grievance was against the judge.

 

[Boxer]

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.

Rightfully. Any time to prepare including drawing and taking a safety off are aforethought.

 

[Boxer]

It is unusual. But Stines accused the judge of "trying to kidnap his wife and daughter" after shooting him, but shooting him five times to assure that he was dead. Surely if the judge was involved in something like this why would Stines silence him? Keep in mind that Stines is law enforcement, not some vigilante parent. He also was afforded the privilege to access the judge's chamber because of his position as sheriff. The judge trusted him.

Some random angry parent would not have been invited in the judge's chamber.

Heck, why didn't the sheriff just arrest the judge instead of killing him?

Yeah, I know the sheriff would have needed an arrest warrant, but heck. At least he wouldn't be facing murder charges and would have "exposed" whatever his grievance was against the judge.

Yes. False arrest eould have been better. This was meant to end and silence, not get justice per se.

 

[Harriett_Eva]

Possibly. But remember, heat of passion (aka "extreme emotional disturbance") is not an absolute defense to a crime, but rather a mitigating factor. Which means, if a defendant uses such, they are essentially admitting the crime, then using heat of passion to lower severity. Heat of passion is a substitute for malice, which as you know is an element of the crime of murder. The argument about malice is for the trial phase, not a preliminary hearing or during a grand jury, the functional equivalent of a prelim. Prosecutor just needs to show he is able to provide evidence of each element of the crime, and it doesn't need to be beyond a reasonable doubt.

Does the GJ only consider the 1st degree murder charge? Or do they have the choice to choose a lesser charge?

 

[AugustWest]

Does the GJ only consider the 1st degree murder charge? Or do they have the choice to choose a lesser charge?

Only the charge presented by the prosecution, which in this case is the murder charge.

A jury during a trial would consider the question of malice (intent vs. heat of passion)

 

[Wallendo]

I believe the intent of the defense lawyer was to feed the public with the idea that this was not a straight-forward murder. There was no real chance the judge would reduce or eliminate the charges. This was simply to get word out to the public that there may be more to the story.

 

[Ontario Mom]

It is unusual. But Stines accused the judge of "trying to kidnap his wife and daughter" after shooting him, AND shooting him five times to assure that he was dead. Surely if the judge was involved in something like this why would Stines silence him? Keep in mind that Stines is law enforcement, not some vigilante parent. He also was afforded the privilege to access the judge's chamber because of his position as sheriff. The judge trusted him.

Some random angry parent would not have been invited in the judge's chamber.

Heck, why didn't the sheriff just arrest the judge instead of killing him?

Yeah, I know the sheriff would have needed an arrest warrant, but heck. At least he wouldn't be facing murder charges and would have "exposed" whatever his grievance was against the judge.

I don't know what to make of the kidnapping comment.
Honestly, until we hear the motive straight from Stines himself, I really don't know what to think about any of this.

 

[Harriett_Eva]

Only the charge presented by the prosecution, which in this case is the murder charge.

A jury during a trial would consider the question of malice (intent vs. heat of passion)

So, hypothetically, if for whatever reason, the GJ didn’t think that the evidence presented to them rose to the level of murder, then no charges would be brought against MS and it would be “over” correct?

 

[Friday Fan]

I don't know what to make of the kidnapping comment.
Honestly, until we hear the motive straight from Stines himself, I really don't know what to think about any of this.

He may never speak because he has the right to remain silent.

 

[AugustWest]

So, hypothetically, if for whatever reason, the GJ didn’t think that the evidence presented to them rose to the level of murder, then no charges would be brought against MS and it would be “over” correct?

For that particular grand jury, yes. However, the charge is dismissed without prejudice, and the prosecutor can seat another grand jury to bring the charge again. Grand juries are normally a rubber stamp on indictment.

See: Rule RCr 5.22 - Procedure upon failure to indict, Ky. R. Crim. P. RCr 5.22 | Casetext Search + Citator

(4) Failure of the grand jury to return an indictment against a defendant does not prevent any charge against such defendant from being submitted to another grand jury.

 

[tlcya]

So, hypothetically, if for whatever reason, the GJ didn’t think that the evidence presented to them rose to the level of murder, then no charges would be brought against MS and it would be “over” correct?

unless the commonwealth THEN responded by putting a request for manslaughter or some lessor charge before the GJ after it declined to indict for murder. I don't think anything prevents them from doing that.

If as @AugustWest explained above the GJ isn't given the leeway to decide to charge him with something lessor than the murder charge brought before them by the commonwealth, I assume the commonwealth has the option of revisiting GJ with a bid for a lessor charge.

Not that I think MS won't be indicted on the current charge, because I think it is hard to deny video evidence of the shooting and the fact that the judge was unarmed. I think it more likely he will be indicted and then when trial time comes defense will ask that the judge to instruct the jury on several other possible lessor charges they could find if they do not find MS guilty of murder. Then at trial argue the extreme emotional disturbance/manslaughter angle.

 

[AugustWest]

unless the commonwealth THEN responded by putting a request for manslaughter or some lessor charge before the GJ after it declined to indict for murder. I don't think anything prevents them from doing that.

If as @AugustWest explained above the GJ isn't given the leeway to decide to charge him with something lessor than the murder charge brought before them by the commonwealth, I assume the commonwealth has the option of revisiting GJ with a bid for a lessor charge.

Not that I think MS won't be indicted on the current charge, because I think it is hard to deny video evidence of the shooting and the fact that the judge was unarmed. I think it more likely he will be indicted and then when trial time comes defense will ask that the judge to instruct the jury on several other possible lessor charges they could find if they do not find MS guilty of murder. Then at trial argue the extreme emotional disturbance/manslaughter angle.

He's going to be indicted for murder. If not this time, then next time. Every element of the crime is on that video.