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

[Kudzuu]

I think the desk and chair could obscure blood MOO. And the caliber and type of bullet is a factor. MS is a big man and the gun looks small in his hands but he wasn't open carrying from what I could tell. I carried a .380 semi automatic loaded with hollow point bullets. Small gun that hides well but packs a punch. Quite a few men like them too.

Now I'm wondering if that is why the judge looked so surprised and threw his hands up as if to say "Wait a minute!" He also said something before MS aimed at him.

I couldn't tell if MS said something first. For my theory that's pretty important.

MOO.

 

[Seattle1]

Anyone up to taking on the possibility of other witnesses hearing it slightly differently ("They took my wife and daughter," for instance)?

How about three different versions?

I think the real question is who benefits most by the word being "kidnapped."

I'll up the ante by giving up the actual witnesses who Stamper received his information from.

Stamper says other Investigators told him Stines said "kidnapped."

What are the chances that Trooper Bates (first on the scene) heard Sites wrong?
Detective Collins, Scott, Caldwell heard wrong? Stamper misunderstood what he was told?

Hands down it's Stines who benefits most! Opens up more options for his defense. Especially if Stines phone calls leading up to the assassination of Mullins caused him to see, imagine, or otherwise perceive that his wife and daughter were not where he expected them to be at a given time on Sept 19, and Stines reasonably believed they were in danger of serious injury, believed Mullins could stop it, and Mullins refused to do so.

Also, there are texts from another phone (Stines employee) that are going to come into evidence to support or dispute something by Stines.

OK, not that I believe this scenario but just more speculation of what a paranoid dude on the edge might think a plausible defense. The same dude described as calm, following the shooting, who only voiced concern about being treated fair. MOO

For clarification purposes, I don't believe the statements by Stines were anywhere near as simultaneous as as presented by OP.

Lead detective Clayton Stamper, KSP, testified that he arrived at the Courthouse later than the others. He believes Trooper Jason Bates was the first KSP personnel on scene, followed by Detective Chris Collins, Detective Scott (?), Detective Eric Caldwell and then Stamper.

Under direct examination, Stamper testified that when he arrived, he observed Stines to appear mostly calm. Stamper talked to him, he was kind of afraid that... basically all he said was 'treat me fair,' that's basically the comments he made.

On the other hand, Stamper wasn't present, and did not hear the alleged comments by Stines about "They're trying to kidnap my wife and kid." During the preliminary hearing, Stamper testified on this hearsay evidence -- statements Stines allegedly made when he was taken into custody that Stamper heard from other Investigators.

Relative to Stines wife and child being in danger, first, Stines is the County Sheriff, and by all accounts a family man. Seems to me that if his family was in danger, Stines would be busting down the walls to the protect them and get to whoever was threatening them immediately. But here, upon taking down Mullins, Stines isn't anxious or worried, but instead he's observed by Stamper to be calm, and concerned about being treated fair.

I'd say that in Stines mind, the danger to his family was gone -- and there was no more threat. JMO

Please reference the preliminary hearing transcript by @Allabouttrial linked in the MEDIA thread.

 

[Friday Fan]

Also, there are texts from another phone (Stines employee) that are going to come into evidence to support or dispute something by Stines.

I got the impression the texts had to do with when, where etc of lunch. (Group text thing) I could be totally wrong, but it seemed to me that was what Stamper implied. OTOH, they interviewed the employee.

 

[Seattle1]

I got the impression the texts had to do with when, where etc of lunch. (Group text thing) I could be totally wrong, but it seemed to me that was what Stamper implied. OTOH, they interviewed the employee.

If true, that hardly seems of evidentiary value to be part of the preliminary hearing or where the cell phone would be taken into custody. There's no dispute where, when, and who attended lunch. JMO.

 

[detectivewannab]

Seeing many comments here and elsewhere speculating that Judge Mullins could have been helping Stines wife and daughter escape a possible domestic violence situation and even allegations that an order of protection requested by Stines wife and signed by Mullins could have played a part in enraging Stines to fire his weapon at Mullins.

While I think all of the above could have angered Stines, I must say that I don't believe any of them would be ethically possible by Judge Mullins pursuant to the Code of Conduct for Judges in the US.

The closer the relationship (Appearance of Impropriety) such as these men who were said to be best friends of 20 years, where Stines once served as Mullins Bailiff for more than a decade before running for Sheriff in 2018, the mere perception of bias can undermine public confidence in the judicial system.

And If true the Stines women turned to Mullins for help, they'd both know Mullins was ethically bound to recuse himself from getting involved, friend or not, and instead point them in the direction of those who could independently assist them.

IME, generally NCO/PO of a sensitive, private nature-- especially involving LE, typically go before the Judge of a different County-- for obvious reasons.

After reviewing the shooting again (slow motion), I don't think Mullins initially understood how much danger he was in by Stines! He's literally scrambling beneath his desk trying to avoid the shots being fired at him. I don't know what Stines realized, imagined, or perceived at that moment but I think he totally surprised Mullins. JMO

Code of Conduct for United States JudgeH

 

[AugustWest]

Quick question, and apologies if asked and answered -- in terms of the causal chain for "extreme emotional disturbance," does the causal element offered need to be factive and proven via evidence, or can it be a statement of more or less well-founded belief?

"I knew based on the following well-supported evidence that X was Y..."

OR

"I believed because Q that X was Y," despite no evidence to that effect.

Just wondering about the strength of foundation required for such a defence to be mounted and prevail in a circumstance like this where other key facts of a crime aren't in dispute (murder caught on video).

Temporal element also interest me, but seems like a different set of questions.

There are competing theories on this subject. The "British" standard relies on an objective view on mistake of fact, while the "American" standard on subjective. The best way I can answer is that the answer varies from jurisdiction to jurisdiction. Also, I refuse to be pinned down to an answer because it is Saturday and I have had one too many old fashioned to get philosophical.

Here's some good law review journal articles on the subject:

https://www.law.georgetown.edu/american-criminal-law-review/wp-content/uploads/sites/15/2018/04/55-2-The-Heat-of-Passion-and-Blameworthy-Reasons-to-Be-Angry.pdf

https://scholarship.law.nd.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1814&context=law_faculty_scholarship

https://repository.law.umich.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1214&context=mjlr

 

[detectivewannab]

The wife and daughter sat two feet behind him in court. Could not of been a protective order.

 

[Friday Fan]

The wife and daughter sat two feet behind him in court. Could not of been a protective order.

He's chained and cuffed.
If an order had been issued, it probably would have been made public since he was booked in jail anyway. The order could have been used to further hold.

KInda don't think one was issued.

Who knows?

Hypothetically there could have been, "My spouse is being a pain, what should I do?" conversations. They won't amount to anything evidence wise, unless there are texts. Also family members can quickly switch sides and close rank even if there was animosity a few days previously. (Casey Anthony)

There was someone in my in-law's family who went nuts. There was so much drama involved. No RO, but lots of calls and going to court to get him committed. Didn't work. Eventually the family simply moved out and left him alone in the house. It was pretty bad and crazy. He was a danger to himself and others. This proved out in the end. Family members emotions were up and down. And this family member was verified nuts, aggressive dementia, psycho nuts, too dangerous to get a restraining order nuts, as in everyone was hiding from him nuts, bad movie nuts. (Much worse than a potential issue with this sheriff, who was working yet appeared to "be under stress")


After it all ended (hit bottom), there was another 180.
I also had a kid with substance issues. Don't even wanna go through my emotions. (Ugh..that was 20 years ago)

Anyway, I don't read anything into his family being supportive in court, because I know how that goes with potential issues.

 

[bestill]

I don't believe his wife and family would have been in court with him if there is a protective order, why would they?? If he's such a threat to them they would be relieved he's in custody and not a threat anymore, why be present for his hearing? All JMO.

 

[Friday Fan]

So theoretically they probably could have been there. (You can be in court with someone you have a RO against)

But technically he probably would have had to surrender his firearm, it would have been public info, esp since he is a sheriff, it can be challenging to obtain one etc.

I was looking at our county's site and it's pretty involved.

I don't live in KY, but copying from our county's site because it's straight forward and easy to read. I was looking at KY's and it wasn't easy to read

It specifically states.

• If you are seeking a family violence Protective Order, the law requires that you prove family violence has occurred and family violence is likely to occur in the future.

The documents each individual will have may vary, but this is a list of evidence commonly available for Protective Order applications, which should be brought with you when you apply for a Protective Order:

• A police report or a police report case number.
• If you have not made a police report, you can obtain guidance on how to do so at the Family Justice Center.
• Photo(s) of your injuries.
  
  

  Protective Orders | Bexar County, TX - Official Website

  The Criminal District Attorney's Office can help you change the pattern of violence that dominates your life.

  www.bexar.org

Kentucky's appears to be require proof of injury. It's just harder to copy and paste from their document.

2. Why file for a Domestic Violence Order (DVO) or Interpersonal Protective Order (IPO)?To be eligible for a DVO or an IPO, the respondent must have either:• Physically injured or assaulted you or a child.• Strangled you or a child

https://www.kycourts.gov/Legal-Help/Documents/P123ProtectiveOrderBooklet.pdf

 

[Seattle1]

Picture it --Stines and Mullins had been around each other weekly for more than 20 years!

Stines became a Bailiff at the Letcher County Courthouse when Sheriff Webb took office in January 2003.

From 2000-2009, Kevin Mullins was the assistant Commonwealth’s Attorney until he was appointed District Court Judge in 2009, to fill a judicial vacancy, and then elected to a full term in 2010. He went on to be re-elected three times, serving a total of 14 years, with Stines as his Bailiff.

Given their ages -- Mullins, who turned 54 in June, and Stines, at 43, they would be like brothers. Stines, the overgrown kid brother Kevin pretended to tolerate but couldn't be prouder of. I imagine Mullins was very supportive of Stines when he decided to run for County Sheriff in 2018.

Not forgetting this is such a horrible tragedy for this community and the families.

Bailiff Under Webb

Kevin Mullins

 

[MollyDDD]

Sitting here, I just had a thought...

I wonder if Stines said "they are trying to steal my family"--which could fit into the idea that Stines' daughter and/or wife were in communication with the judge and/or others in order to get help with a situation involving Stines. It could be as basic as daughter or mom talking to the judge about being worried that Stines was on drugs or was having psychiatric issues due to his recent change in behavior and asking him to assist them in getting help for Stines. In his current state, Stines could have viewed the judge offering help/trying to help the family set up services for him as the judge (and the places suggested to help Stines like rehab, therapy, etc) as "these people turning my family against me...trying to separate me from my family, breaking us up, trying to take them away from me."

I could then see Stamper in his retelling condensing that and using the word "kidnap" as an adjacent but not entirely accurate word choice.

A brilliant deduction!

 

[MollyDDD]

I think the desk and chair could obscure blood MOO. And the caliber and type of bullet is a factor. MS is a big man and the gun looks small in his hands but he wasn't open carrying from what I could tell. I carried a .380 semi automatic loaded with hollow point bullets. Small gun that hides well but packs a punch. Quite a few men like them too.

Now I'm wondering if that is why the judge looked so surprised and threw his hands up as if to say "Wait a minute!" He also said something before MS aimed at him.

I couldn't tell if MS said something first. For my theory that's pretty important.

MOO.

It was awful to watch. To me, when Stine first aimed his gun at Mullins, he raised his hand as if to say, “woah, wait a minute”, like he wanted to try to explain something to Stine, but still he fired the gun. Mullins must have been so frightened to be trapped in that corner. IMO

 

[Knox]

It was awful to watch. To me, when Stine first aimed his gun at Mullins, he raised his hand as if to say, “woah, wait a minute”, like he wanted to try to explain something to Stine, but still he fired the gun. Mullins must have been so frightened to be trapped in that corner. IMO

Exactly, I don’t think he thought Stines would actually shoot him. Was the raised hand left hand a dismissive gesture or defensive? I wonder if he lit up in his office routinely or was that a sign of the stress level in the room?

 

[Friday Fan]

Exactly, I don’t think he thought Stines would actually shoot him. Was the raised hand left hand a dismissive gesture or defensive? I wonder if he lit up in his office routinely or was that a sign of the stress level in the room?

I think was gesturing, "There's no need for that. Let's talk this out". I think he was trying to talk him down etc. Then, it quickly became defensive when he pointed the gun.

One of the comments on his obituary was from someone who enjoyed "going for a smoke" with him.

What I also noticed is around the the 14:52:28 second mark, what appears to be a phone on the desk lights up. I don't know whose phone it is. It's closer to where Stines would have been sitting.

Stines seems to move about the scene pretty calmly and methodologically. You can see his face in a few frames if you slow it down.

 

[al66pine]

Stack of Disposable Cups on Judge's Desk?

Are all the cups for use as disposable ashtrays? I’ve seen this done with a little water in them. He has two cups in front of him. One coffee, one ashtray? Is that a silver-colored lighter as well? And a can of air freshener? The office almost looks like a hidden picture page…

@Live_and_Learn Good point in your post, paper cups used as disposable ashtrays for ciggies.

As a home office employee conducting a branch office inspection, I recall visiting a branch where the branch manager "chewed." (Ugh ) He used paper cups as "spit cups" and went thru many in the course of the day I spent there.

Been a couple decades ago, but seeing pix of cup stacks on the judge's desk prompted me to think of "spit cups" as a possible explanation to their presence.
But not seeing it as particularly relevant to this case. Imo, Icbw.

____________________________

Chewing tobacco - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[MollyDDD]

I think was gesturing, "There's no need for that. Let's talk this out". I think he was trying to talk him down etc. Then, it quickly became defensive when he pointed the gun.

One of the comments on his obituary was from someone who enjoyed "going for a smoke" with him.

What I also noticed is around the the 14:52:28 second mark, what appears to be a phone on the desk lights up. I don't know whose phone it is. It's closer to where Stines would have been sitting.

Stines seems to move about the scene pretty calmly and methodologically. You can see his face in a few frames if you slow it down.

I agree, gesturing. It might have been the daughter calling back.
There’s obviously a whole story yet to be told. So heartbreaking for so many people. IMO

 

[LadyL]

Yes, you're correct --- and it's a creative take on the mining business there in that state ... this was already discussed and the enhanced photos showed the quilt in a clearer frame; and I did acknowledge this.

Welcome to Websleuths, @UK Feline !

I don't know if it was mentioned but Mullin's Dad was a miner. People were wondering why he had the quilt hanging in his office.

 

[LadyL]

Stack of Disposable Cups on Judge's Desk?

@Live_and_Learn Good point in your post, paper cups used as disposable ashtrays for ciggies.

As a home office employee conducting a branch office inspection, I recall visiting a branch where the branch manager "chewed." (Ugh ) He used paper cups as "spit cups" and went thru many in the course of the day I spent there.

Been a couple decades ago, but seeing pix of cup stacks on the judge's desk prompted me to think of "spit cups" as a possible explanation to their presence.
But not seeing it as particularly relevant to this case. Imo, Icbw.

____________________________

Chewing tobacco - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

I just find it interesting that he was allowed to smoke in a court building. Or maybe he wasn't supposed to and that's why he used disposable cups as ashtrays.

Or is it legal in the U.S.??

 

[LadyL]

The wife and daughter sat two feet behind him in court. Could not of been a protective order.

protective orders aren't in effect in courthouses because victims often have to testify in court cases against their assailant JMO