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

[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.

 

[Seattle1]

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?

Hypothetically, I think every existing video of the shooting in the universe would have to vanish, as well as the weapon, for a grand jury not to indict on murder, and the case to be over. And I don't see any of the above happening.

 

[tlcya]

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

absolutely agree with you on this.

 

[Harriett_Eva]

the fact that the judge was unarmed

Do we know that for a fact? Was it mentioned? Or was he unarmed in the video clip shown and assuming from that? I can’t remember-

MS obviously shot the judge - that is undeniable- the almost instant murder charges were kind of odd- as is a lot with this case-

 

[Parsnip]

DBM: lack of referent

 

[Parsnip]

Do we know that for a fact? Was it mentioned? Or was he unarmed in the video clip shown and assuming from that? I can’t remember-

MS obviously shot the judge - that is undeniable- the almost instant murder charges were kind of odd- as is a lot with this case-

Per KSP during the PC hearing, no gun was found on the judge or in chambers.

 

[Seattle1]

Do we know that for a fact? Was it mentioned? Or was he unarmed in the video clip shown and assuming from that? I can’t remember-

MS obviously shot the judge - that is undeniable- the almost instant murder charges were kind of odd- as is a lot with this case-

Yes, per the sworn testimony of lead detective Clayton Stamper:

DEFENSE - Okay, so you're carrying the case. So I want to make sure I understand - had Judge Mullins been removed from chambers when you arrived.

DETECTIVE - No.

DEFENSE - Were you able to ascertain - did he have a firearm on his person?

DETECTIVE - We did not locate one.

DEFENSE - You did not locate one?

DETECTIVE - No, there was not one in the chambers.

DEFENSE - Okay, and there was none on his person?

DETECTIVE - No.

Post in thread 'Kentucky - Judge killed, sheriff arrested in Letcher County courthouse shooting - Sep. 19, 2024'

Yesterday at 1:17 AM

Erm I apologise in advance for the length....

PROBABLE CAUSE HEARING

1ST OCTOBER

PROSECUTOR - Can you state your name for the record?

DETECTIVE - Clayton Stamper.

PROSECUTOR - How are you employed?

DETECTIVE - I'm a detective with the Kentucky State Police assigned to post 13 hazard.

PROSECUTOR - How long have you been employed?

DETECTIVE - I've been with KSP a little over 24 years. A detective since 2006.

PROSECUTOR - And have you in the (inaudible), have you investigated the death of Kevin Mullins?

DETECTIVE...

• Allabouttrial

• 
• 
• 

 

[tlcya]

Do we know that for a fact? Was it mentioned? Or was he unarmed in the video clip shown and assuming from that? I can’t remember-

MS obviously shot the judge - that is undeniable- the almost instant murder charges were kind of odd- as is a lot with this case-

he was unarmed in the video shown at hearing. The defense attorney also made a point when questioning the investigator at the hearing to ask if any firearm had been found in the judge's chambers and had LEOs searched for one. The investigator stated they had searched for one and no gun was found. The questions were not about the sheriff's weapon as they had already discussed Stines having turned his over, so they were discussing any potential weapon in relation to Mullins. There was none.

 

[Harriett_Eva]

Thank you ALL for helping me get up to speed and understand what’s going on in the case legally in KY -

 

[Elley Mae]

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

Thank you.

As a daughter of a cop who used to be a court liaison officer the last few years of 32 years. I can not fathom having a judges # in my contacts, or the chief of police who my father was very good friends with. It just would not happen.

Jmo

 

[Tricia]

Sure, here you go.

Post in thread 'Kentucky - Judge killed, sheriff arrested in Letcher County courthouse shooting - Sep. 19, 2024'

Sep 25, 2024

SHERIFF STINES HAD NOT ‘BEEN HIMSELF’ IN THE DAYS LEADING UP TO HIS MURDER OF LETCHER DISTRICT JUDGE KEVIN MULLINS

As hateful and unfounded rumors continue making their way through social media sites and elsewhere, a disturbing picture of what really transpired in the Letcher County Courthouse last week has begun to emerge.

Friends and coworkers say Letcher County Sheriff Mickey Stines had been acting erratically since around Labor Day. He was quieter than usual and had stopped regular communications with the community and the press. In mid-August he deleted his office’s Facebook page...

• MassGuy

• 
• 

Post in thread 'Kentucky - Judge killed, sheriff arrested in Letcher County courthouse shooting - Sep. 19, 2024'

Yesterday at 1:17 AM

Erm I apologise in advance for the length....

PROBABLE CAUSE HEARING

1ST OCTOBER

PROSECUTOR - Can you state your name for the record?

DETECTIVE - Clayton Stamper.

PROSECUTOR - How are you employed?

DETECTIVE - I'm a detective with the Kentucky State Police assigned to post 13 hazard.

PROSECUTOR - How long have you been employed?

DETECTIVE - I've been with KSP a little over 24 years. A detective since 2006.

PROSECUTOR - And have you in the (inaudible), have you investigated the death of Kevin Mullins?

DETECTIVE...

• Allabouttrial

• 
• 
• 

Without a motive, Kentucky sheriff's shooting of judge leaves more questions than answers

They'd been friends for years and were two well-known elected officials. So why would Letcher County's sheriff shoot its only judge in the courthouse?

www.courier-journal.com

Thank you Seattle. I appreciate it.

 

[GarAndTeed]

@Friday Fan wrote:
The portion played in court opens with Stines standing and Mullins sitting at his desk in his black robe. This is what happened next:

▪ Stines pointed his gun at Mullins from perhaps five feet away. The judge raised one hand, perhaps a gesture to ward off the threat, then turned away from Stines and hunkered over in his chair.

Read more at: https://www.kentucky.com/news/local/crime/article293386104.html#storylink=cpy

This may be insignificant, but when the judge went to lunch, would he be wearing his black robe? I've rarely seen judges in their robes when not in court and doing something with friends in public. So I'm wondering if he donned his robe when he entered his chambers- and if so, why?
Also, would he offer to meet with Stines privately if he was involved in something inappropriate with Stine's daughter? I'd think he might hesitate, knowing things could go south quickly (not anticipating being shot, but perhaps a loud confrontation,, etc.)
I'm spacey today, so I hope I'm making sense on some level! Just a couple of random thoughts...

 

[Parsnip]

So I'm wondering if he donned his robe when he entered his chambers- and if so, why?

That is a really good observation!

ETA: it is unlikely, ime, that the judge would have still had his robes on at lunch. But he clearly had them on when he was shot. There are certain things that judges hear in chambers…search warrants, for example, that are not recorded, for obvious reasons.

 

[PrairieWind]

@Friday Fan wrote:
The portion played in court opens with Stines standing and Mullins sitting at his desk in his black robe. This is what happened next:

▪ Stines pointed his gun at Mullins from perhaps five feet away. The judge raised one hand, perhaps a gesture to ward off the threat, then turned away from Stines and hunkered over in his chair.

Read more at: https://www.kentucky.com/news/local/crime/article293386104.html#storylink=cpy

This may be insignificant, but when the judge went to lunch, would he be wearing his black robe? I've rarely seen judges in their robes when not in court and doing something with friends in public. So I'm wondering if he donned his robe when he entered his chambers- and if so, why?
Also, would he offer to meet with Stines privately if he was involved in something inappropriate with Stine's daughter? I'd think he might hesitate, knowing things could go south quickly (not anticipating being shot, but perhaps a loud confrontation,, etc.)
I'm spacey today, so I hope I'm making sense on some level! Just a couple of random thoughts...

Judges typically don't put on their robe until they are about to head in to court or if they are doing some official in some other location. In this case, my guess is that the Judge was going to be going in to Court shortly.
There could be various reasons for a Judge to meet with the Sheriff. They could be discussing jail issues or some procedures regarding court operations, etc. Or since they were acquaintances, lots of reasons to have a short discussion. or if there were something illicit going on, the Judge not wanting that conversation to occur in front of others (not knowing he was about to be shot, of course).

 

[Parsnip]

Judges typically don't put on their robe until they are about to head in to court or if they are doing some official in some other location. In this case, my guess is that the Judge was going to be going in to Court shortly.
There could be various reasons for a Judge to meet with the Sheriff. They could be discussing jail issues or some procedures regarding court operations, etc. Or since they were acquaintances, lots of reasons to have a short discussion. or if there were something illicit going on, the Judge not wanting that conversation to occur in front of others (not knowing he was about to be shot, of course).

So, from what we learned and saw from the video shown at the PC hearing, we know that the judge was in chambers and in robes. Further, we know that several people were present in some part of chambers when MS entered, and chambers were emptied. So, we know Judge had donned his robes at some point after lunch and before the shooting. Is it possible that he was handling a proceeding off the record in his office when the sheriff interrupted? Speculation on my part.

 

[detectivewannab]

Thank you.

As a daughter of a cop who used to be a court liaison officer the last few years of 32 years. I can not fathom having a judges # in my contacts, or the chief of police who my father was very good friends with. It just would not happen.

Jmo

She is older then the Mullins children perhaps she baby sat them.

 

[Cryptic]

So I'm wondering if he donned his robe when he entered his chambers- and if so, why?

He may of had chamber time mixed with up coming hearings that afternoon. Thus, he kept his robe on to avoid having to take it on and and off?