I agree, and while I have a suspicion about what some of those facts might be, I will not/cannot post them here.Even when facts are released, I have a nagging suspicion that some facts won't see the light of day.
jmo
I agree, and while I have a suspicion about what some of those facts might be, I will not/cannot post them here.
I also feel that it's gonna knock a lot of socks off a lot of people.
The full story is always much deeper than what gets published. That's what I meant.Well, the facts can't shock us if we never actually know about them... which will only fuel the non-stop rumors which will continue to churn.
jmo
I disagree. I've followed plenty of cases where the full story was disclosed and understood. JMO.The full story is always much deeper than what gets published. That's what I meant.
This guy has been described as cooperative, which means he is talking. Those cell phones will talk as well, and will likely support or refute the account this guy is providing. This case is also being investigated by an independent agency, which means they have no skin in the game. I see no reason why we won't know just about everything here.I disagree. I've followed plenty of cases where the full story was disclosed and understood. JMO.
1st is not rage in an argument. He was aware of what he was going to do and proceeded.KY judge shooting 'looks very much like first-degree murder': Attorney | Banfield
Sep 20, 2024 #Banfield #Sheriff #Kentucky
Matt Murphy, defense attorney and former homicide prosecutor, tells "Banfield" that anything is possible when it comes to prosecuting Sheriff Shawn M. Stines for the shooting death of District Judge Kevin Mullins, but that the facts of the case have the potential to put the sheriff away for life — and possibly get him the death penalty.
This guy has been described as cooperative, which means he is talking. Those cell phones will talk as well, and will likely support or refute the account this guy is providing. This case is also being investigated by an independent agency, which means they have no skin in the game. I see no reason why we won't know just about everything here.
9/21/24
Letcher County official reveals details about sheriff-judge shooting | Banfield
OK, that's very different from the reporting that they each swapped phones, which didn't make a lot of sense. I think it's possible that Stines had a screenshot of something saved on his phone, and wanted the judge’s phone to see if it was real.New info to me from interview with Mike Watts, Circuit Court Clerk:
Watts alleged that Sheriff Stines received Mullins phone from him and with Mullins phone in one hand and his phone in the other, Stines compared something being displayed before setting the phones down, getting up and walking around the desk to Mullins-- shooting him 8 times.
Also, following the shooting, Stines did not approach fallen Mullins or attempt to render aid but instead picked up Mullins phone again, looked at it, and set it back down on the desk before exiting Mullins Chambers and leaving the Court via the side exit. Stines then re-entered the Courthouse through the front entrance and surrendered, placing his weapon on a table in the Courtroom.
Per Watts, employees and witnesses had evacuated the building at the sound of gunfire, and Stines re-entered the Courthouse along with first responders arriving at the scene.
When asked if Stines was in uniform and/or on duty on Thursday, Watts confirmed he was not in uniform but that the Sheriff is on duty 24/7.
Watts offered that both men served the community admirably, and worked in concert to combat the drug epidemic in the community. He cited that Stiles shared Mullins view that jailing addicts was not the answer, and Stines would often drive the offenders to their Court Ordered drug treatment.
IMO, Watts was painfully grieved while talking to Banfield (who constantly interrupted her guest, as she does). I think Watts is still in shock. MOO
Except Mullins didn't have both phones -- it was Stines that was comparing his phone with Mullins phone after Mullins voluntarily gave it to him. (Stines was holding two phones).OK, that's very different from the reporting that they each swapped phones, which didn't make a lot of sense. I think it's possible that Mullins had a screenshot of something saved on his phone, and wanted the sheriff's phone to see if it was real.
Except Mullins didn't have both phones -- it was Stines that was comparing his phone with Mullins phone after Mullins voluntarily gave it to him. (Stines was holding two phones).
I am pretty sure they already said Pike county will get this case.You have a very good point here. I agree with you that they will try to seat a jury and have the trial in Letcher County.
I do know that Kentucky requires a criminal case to be tried in the county where the crime occurred.
And since the murder occurred in Letcher County, they will try to have the trial in Letcher County.
But if a jury cannot be seated for a trial in Letcher County, then there would be a change of venue motion to have the trial in another county.
And due to the circumstances of this pending criminal trial, a special prosecutor and a special judge from a different county will have to be appointed.
Why did Stines exit the side door then reenter from the front? I wonder if he placed his phone (the phone he had in his hand) in his car, and then reenter to surrender?
<modsnip: Quoted post was removed as part of thread cleanup>
I'm surprised there hasn't been more (or maybe even ANY) sleuthing (by WSers or others?) into the personal details of the sheriff. He is the suspect, the person of interest, the perp, the accused, the charged one in this case. I thought that was the criteria needing to be met to give sleuths the greenlight to find out all they can about a person in any case. Maybe I've missed it, but I've read this entire thread, and I haven't seen anything yet. Mainly I thought I would've seen simple things like if he's married, divorced, how many children, if any, ages of children... This info alone could rule out (or leave open the possibility of) certain theories made in other places that haven't been backed up by any reliable sources. Seems like it would be easy enough (and within WS terms) to find this out. He's a public official whose info is often found online in many ways for many reasons, probably publicly-available details out there on him, plus he had his own FB profile that I believe he posted on that could reveal enlightening things.
<modsnip>
... at WS, people do care about the truth. But we also love to sleuth! One leads to the other, ime.