Allabouttrial
Until you've walked a mile in someone else's shoes
- Joined
- Mar 11, 2018
- Messages
- 6,380
- Reaction score
- 54,103
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 - Yes, sir, I did.
PROSECUTOR - And can you tell us on what date that was?
DETECTIVE - It was September 19th, 2024.
PROSECUTOR - In an investigation of that death, were you able to determine who killed Kevin Mullins?
DETECTIVE - Yes.
PROSECUTOR - And how were you able to do that?
DETECTIVE - Video surveillance footage.
PROSECUTOR - And did you retrieve that video surveillance footage?
DETECTIVE - I did.
(Prosecutor requests for video to be entered. Defense objects. Sidebar. Video is then played)
PROSECUTOR - Are you able to identify the people in the video?
DETECTIVE - That was Sheriff Mickey Stines and Judge Kevin Mullins.
PROSECUTOR - And officer, who had the firearm?
DETECTIVE - Sheriff Stines.
PROSECUTOR - And the Judge was also in his black robe?
DETECTIVE - Yes.
PROSECUTOR - Do you know what portion of the courthouse that is?
DETECTIVE - That is the judge's chambers.
PROSECUTOR - And where is that located at ... physically located?
DETECTIVE - In the Letcher County Courthouse.
PROSECUTOR - That's all I have your honor.
(Judges asks defense if they would like to cross examine the witness)
DEFENSE - That was a short clip that was played there, how long do you believe that clip was?
DETECTIVE - That we just watched?
DEFENSE - Yes.
DETECTIVE - Just 10 seconds, 15 seconds.
DEFENSE - In fact, the video that was taken in the Judge's chambers between the meeting between Sheriff Stines and Judge Mullins, it's my understanding, that video lasted much longer, correct?
DETECTIVE - Yes.
DEFENSE - Okay, and have you had an opportunity to review the video of the prior incident?
DETECTIVE - I have.
DEFENSE - And can you describe for us what happened immediately prior to the clip that we saw?
DETECTIVE - Sheriff Stines' uses his telephone to make some phone calls, he then borrows Judge Mullens' cell phone, and appears to make a call on that, and that led to what you just saw.
DEFENSE - Okay, so it's my understanding there were some people who were having a meeting with Judge Mullens prior to the Sheriff's entry into the chambers - is that correct?
DETECTIVE - Yes.
DEFENSE - Have you identified those witnesses?
DETECTIVE - I don't know the names of them. There's about approximately four people in there, then Sheriff Stines enters the Judge's chambers, and everybody else clears out.
DEFENSE - You don't know their names?
DETECTIVE - Not right off, no.
DEFENSE - Have you prepared a report?
DETECTIVE - I am in the process, yes.
DEFENSE - You're in the process of preparing a report?
DETECTIVE - Yes, a lot of information.
DEFENSE - But you've not spoken to any of those witnesses?
DETECTIVE - Not directly, but they've all been interviewed. There's recorded interviews of those people in the case.
DEFENSE - Okay, so other officers have spoken with those four witnesses?
DETECTIVE - Yes.
DEFENSE - And what is your understanding of what those four witnesses have said?
DETECTIVE - I don't recall.
DEFENSE - You have no idea what they said?
DETECTIVE - No.
DEFENSE - I want to make sure I understand, had there been a hearing previously, this day, in chambers?
DETECTIVE - In the courtroom?
DEFENSE - No, in chambers?
DETECTIVE - Not that I'm aware of.
DEFENSE - And so there's a video camera that is running in the District Judge's chambers - is that on all the time?
DETECTIVE - It's my understanding, yes.
DEFENSE - Have you spoken with anyone about why that may be?
DETECTIVE - No, I mean, there's cameras throughout the courthouse.
DEFENSE - Well, fair enough, but are you familiar with District Judges chambers, normally? how they're set up?
DETECTIVE - No, I mean, some of them have video surveillance and some don't.
DEFENSE - Right, but generally when they have surveillance, you agree with me that that is utilized when there is a proceeding going on in chambers, correct?
DETECTIVE - It could be, yes.
DEFENSE - I'm just asking, so this video didn't have an audio recording to it?
DETECTIVE - There's no audio.
DEFENSE - Outside of the... what's the four people that were inside, that we don't know their names - once these four people had left the chambers, were they in an area adjacent where they could hear anything that was going on?
DETECTIVE - Yes, I believe some of them did remain in the next room.
DEFENSE - And what did they tell you?
DETECTIVE - Do I...?
DEFENSE - What did they hear?
DETECTIVE - I've not been part.. I wasn't part of those interviews.
DEFENSE - Okay, so if I'm understanding correctly you're preparing for a preliminary hearing on a murder and there are witnesses in an adjacent room....
DETECTIVE - They heard gunshots.
DEFENSE - So you are investigating a murder and testifying at a preliminary hearing, and there are witnesses who may have overheard what preceded this edited clip, yet you can't tell us today anything that they said?
DETECTIVE - I've not personally listened to those interviews. I've talked to the other officers that did those interviews.
DEFENSE - Fair enough. I mean, we're here at a preliminary hearing, as you know, you can testify to hearsay, I'm asking what they said.
DETECTIVE - They heard gunshots.
DEFENSE - Okay. Was there any statements that they overheard?
DETECTIVE - No.
DEFENSE - Were there raised voices?
DETECTIVE - There... one person stated that she heard... she didn't recognize him as being Judge Mullens' voice, but heard somebody say 'help, help'.
DEFENSE - Presumably, that will be after the firearm was drawn or shot?
(Prosecutor objects, defense withdraws question)
DEFENSE - So is there any testimony that you can give us today about any statements or arguments or the content of that argument prior to the shooting?
DETECTIVE - No.
DEFENSE - So I want to ask generally so - did you process the scene? are you the lead investigator on this case?
DETECTIVE - I am.
DEFENSE - Okay, so as a lead investigator, I would presume that you would have secured the chambers and evidence once you arrived?
DETECTIVE - I was part of that, yes.
DEFENSE - You were a part of it, right, but you're the lead investigator so you'd be in charge of those duties, delegating what should be done - is that fair?
DETECTIVE - No, I don't delegate what's done.
DEFENSE - Okay, so you're the lead investigator - what does that mean?
DETECTIVE - I'm the case officer.
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.
DEFENSE - Okay, all right, who was the first person to arrive on behalf of law enforcement to investigate?
DETECTIVE - They were already in the courthouse.
DEFENSE - Fair enough, but I'm talking about in terms of people that we may see a report from or take part in this investigation. Who would be the first?
DETECTIVE - I believe Trooper Jason Bates was the first KSP personnel on scene.
DEFENSE - And you spoke with him and he..
DETECTIVE - I did.
DEFENSE - And he searched and did not locate a firearm?
DETECTIVE - No, he didn't search the scene, no. His role at that point was security at the scene.
DEFENSE - I understand, but I'm just trying to ascertain if there was a firearm found?
DETECTIVE - No.
DEFENSE - Was it specifically searched for, a firearm?
DETECTIVE - In the Judge's chambers?
DEFENSE - Yes sir.
DETECTIVE - There was myself, Detective Chris Collins, Detective Scott (?), Detective Eric Caldwell, that's all I recall right now.
DEFENSE - Okay, so I'm trying to understand, who searched specifically for a firearm?
DETECTIVE - We all did.
DEFENSE - And that was specifically something you looked for?
DETECTIVE - Yes.
DEFENSE - Fair enough. In the course of your investigation did you ascertain that if prior in the day there had been a lunch meeting between Sheriff Stines and Judge Mullens?
DETECTIVE - There was.
DEFENSE - Where did this take place?
DETECTIVE - It's a restaurant called SteetSide and it's just down the street from the courthouse.
DEFENSE - And, it's my understanding there were a couple of other people who attended the luncheon?
DETECTIVE - There were several, yes.
DEFENSE - And at some point after that they wrapped up lunch and left, obviously, and went back to the courthouse. Are you aware of anything, so far in your investigation, that would tell us that there was any issues at lunch between Judge Mullens...
DETECTIVE - No.
DEFENSE - ...and Sheriff Stines?
DETECTIVE - No.
DEFENSE - Has someone on behalf of the KSP spoken to those witnesses?
DETECTIVE - Yes, they've all been interviewed.
DEFENSE - And there was nothing unusual that had arisen during that luncheon?
DETECTIVE - I was told that the Judge made a statement to Mickey about 'do we need to meet private in my chambers?' That's all I was told.
DEFENSE - Do you know the context of what the conversation was that they would need to discuss in chambers?
DETECTIVE - I do not.
DEFENSE - So it's my understanding that in the larger portion of the video, that we haven't had access to, that there is a point when Sheriff Stines asked for... to see the telephone of Judge Mullens?
DETECTIVE - Yes.
DEFENSE - Is that a yes?
DETECTIVE - Yes.
DEFENSE - And I would presume that you and the other officers you mentioned - when you secured the scene, that you secured those phones as well, is that correct?
DETECTIVE - Yes.
DEFENSE - And have you reviewed both of those phones?
DETECTIVE - They're currently at the forensic lab at this time, being downloaded. I have had discussions with the people at the lab regarding the downloads.
DEFENSE - And those are a couple other questions I want to ask you, but my original question was - have you reviewed or are you aware of the content of the phones?
DETECTIVE - I've not personally seen it because I've not received those reports yet.
DEFENSE - Again, based upon your conversation with the officers, are you aware of any recent content that was up and could have been relevant at the time of their discussion?
DETECTIVE - I was told that Sheriff Stines had tried to call his daughter, and he had tried to call his daughter from the Judge's phone also.
DEFENSE - So, have you obtained the phone records from Judge Mullens' phone?
DETECTIVE - I don't have those in my possession yet, no.
DEFENSE - Have you issued a search warrant for those?
DETECTIVE - Yes, yes.
DEFENSE - And have officers confirmed that the Sheriff's daughter's phone number was on Judge Mullens' phone?
DETECTIVE - Yes.
DEFENSE - So that number had been called from Judge Mullens' phone?
DETECTIVE - Yes.
DEFENSE - So, we don't have a viewing of what transpired during that exchange of phones, but based upon your review of those moments prior to when Sheriff Stines observes that cell phone is it... was he previously seated?
DETECTIVE - Yes.
DEFENSE - Okay, so when we saw him he was standing the entire time.
DETECTIVE - He was seated in front of the Judge's desk.
DEFENSE - And when he looks at the cell phone - what is... can you describe his reaction in the video we haven't seen?
DETECTIVE - Whose reaction?
DEFENSE - The Sheriff.
DETECTIVE - You can't see his face in the video.
DEFENSE - Okay, but is it clear that.. does it appear to you that.. let me rephrase this - did he stand up after looking at the phone?
DETECTIVE - Yes, he stood up.
DEFENSE - And how long after he looked at the cell phone and stood up did this occur before what you played.
DETECTIVE - Just seconds.
DEFENSE - Did you make the decision on edits today for what you were going to present? Did you make the edit to determine which portion of the video we were going to see today?
DETECTIVE - No sir, I did not.
DEFENSE - Both cell phones have been sent to the State Police Forensic team, is that correct?
DETECTIVE - Yes.
DEFENSE - Have you gotten any early report on what was found?
DETECTIVE - No.
DEFENSE - Were both phones still on the desk when you arrived?
DETECTIVE - The Judge's phone was on the desk, Sheriff Stines' phone was on his person.
DEFENSE - So are there photographs of... was the phone unlocked at that point, or was it still open?
DETECTIVE - Are you asking about both of them?
DEFENSE - Well first let's talk about.. first I'm talking about Judge Mullins' since his was the one that was still on the desk, and presumably nobody touched it right prior to you securing it, correct?
DETECTIVE - No, no.
DEFENSE - Yeah so I'd like to know about that, have you ascertained what was currently open on that cell phone?
DETECTIVE - No, I don't know at this point, no.
DEFENSE - You don't know?
DETECTIVE - No.
DEFENSE - Do you think that would be.. do you think that would be important to learn?
DETECTIVE - I hope to learn that when the reports ready, yes.
DEFENSE - But as of today you can't tell us what was currently open on the Judge's phone?
DETECTIVE - No sir.
DEFENSE - Did you conduct an interview with Sheriff Stine's daughter?
DETECTIVE - I did not but she has been interviewed.
DEFENSE - Are you aware of... who was present when she was being interviewed?
DETECTIVE - Lieutenant Randy Combs and Detective Anthony Trotter.
DEFENSE - And she was interviewed with or without her parent.
DETECTIVE - With.
DEFENSE - So her parent was present at the time you interviewed her?
DETECTIVE - Yes I believe. I wasn't there, but yes, I think so.
DEFENSE - Law enforcement has not spoken to her without her parent present?
DETECTIVE - Not that I'm aware of.
DEFENSE - Did state police obtain her phone?
DETECTIVE - No.
DEFENSE - Do you intend to intended obtain records for her cell phone number?
DETECTIVE - Possibly, yes.
DEFENSE - Do you believe that that would be soon that you'll do that?
DETECTIVE - Could be, yes.
DEFENSE - Had you ever intended to do that or did you just... respond to my question?
DETECTIVE - Well, the call should be on the Judge's records too and she's made statements about what occurred during those conversations.
DEFENSE - I understand that but I would presume that.. have you ascertained whether Judge Mullens also had apps that stand outside of phone records?
DETECTIVE - I've not received those records yet, I don't know what's on the phone.
DEFENSE - Fair enough, but I mean did you look at the phone? did it appear there were apps on it?
DETECTIVE - I'm not the person that's qualified to look through the phone.
DEFENSE - Okay, but you're familiar with a cell phone, they can host other forms of communication.
(Objection from prosecutor as to asked and answered. Judge says he can testify to any personal knowledge he has)
DEFENSE - So you're aware that phones can be used for apps, such as Facebook?
DETECTIVE - Yes.
DEFENSE - Okay, and that is not something that is captured by cell phone records - you'd agree with me?
DETECTIVE - I agree.
DEFENSE - So, in light of that, although the records may be mutually the same... the same between Judge Mullens' phone and the Sheriff's daughter do you believe that you could also ascertain other information from a cell phone app content?
DETECTIVE - Are you asking what apps are on the phone?
DEFENSE - Yes, well that was my original question..
DETECTIVE - Well, I don't about... I've not received that report yet. I don't know what apps he had downloaded on the phone.
DEFENSE - If he has social media apps do you intend to....
DETECTIVE - That could lead to additional search warrants, yes.
DEFENSE - Had you determined whether there were any previous issues, personal or professional between Sheriff Stines and Judge Mullens?
DETECTIVE - I've heard things.
DEFENSE - What have you heard?
DETECTIVE - Just that this... just regarding the lawsuit that Letcher County Sheriff's office is currently involved with.
DEFENSE - The lawsuit that involved, ultimately, the criminal conviction of a deputy for sexual behaviour in the Judge's chambers, is that the one you're referring to?
DETECTIVE - Yes.
DEFENSE - The subject matter of that lawsuit, the chambers area, that's the same chambers in which this occurred, is that correct?
DETECTIVE - I'm not familiar with the details of that case... the lawsuit resulted from
DEFENSE - Are you aware of any criminal reports that Sheriff Stines had made of Judge Mullens prior to this day?
DETECTIVE - No.
DEFENSE - Did you personally observe Sheriff Stines, following this video?
DETECTIVE - Did I personally observe him what?
DEFENSE - Did you meet with him? did you talk to him after.... ?
DETECTIVE - He was in custody when I arrived at the courthouse that afternoon.
DEFENSE - And at some point, did you draw any observations as to his demeanour?
DETECTIVE - He was mostly calm, I thought, I mean, I talked to him, but not... he didn't say nothing about why this had happened, but he was calm. He was kind of afraid that... basically all he said was 'treat me fair', that's basically the comments he made.
DEFENSE - Did he also make a statement about... I didn't see it in the citation, somewhere along the lines of a statement being true to him about protecting his family?
DETECTIVE - He was.. I wasn't present, but when he.. when he was taken into custody, I was told by one of the other officers that were there, that he made a comment 'they're trying to kidnap my wife and kid'.
DEFENSE - Have you ascertained any evidence that this shooting was pre-planned?
DETECTIVE - No, not at this time.
DEFENSE - And would you agree that, from what we've seen so far, the evidence you've seen so far, the shooting was a reaction to what was on that cell phone in that moment, is that accurate?
(Prosecutor objects as calls for speculation and outside scope of these proceedings. Judge sustains objection)
DEFENSE - So is there anything other than the content of the phone, if this video will reveal to us about why this took place?
DETECTIVE - No.
DEFENSE - Does it appear that this took place as a reaction to what was happening in the chambers at that point?
DETECTIVE - I can say it occurred after a phone call was made. I don't know what was said or nothing like that, but...
DEFENSE - Fair enough, and I'm not asking you the content of any of that but, at this point, is it your theory that whatever that content was and the discussion, was that the impetus of the shooting?
DETECTIVE - It could be but I don' know that for a fact.
DEFENSE - Okay, do you have any evidence, up until this point, that you have developed that would demonstrate that it was not as reaction to what was on the phone?
DETECTIVE - No.
DEFENSE - None whatsoever?
DETECTIVE - No.
DEFENSE - Did you attempt to speak to Sheriff Stines at the Leslie County jail after the incident?
DETECTIVE - No.
DEFENSE - Did anyone from your agency attempt to interview him?
DETECTIVE - Not to my knowledge, no.
DEFENSE - At and that point, have you asserted his right to an attorney or anything?
DETECTIVE - No.
DEFENSE - Nobody went back and tried to talk to him or do an interview?
DETECTIVE - No.
DEFENSE - I think I have one other question, in addition to cell phones that we discussed, the cell phone of Sheriff Stines and the cell phone that you found of Sheriff Mullens' were there additional phones that you were able to obtain?
DETECTIVE - There was one other phone that's currently being examined, and the basic reason it was seized was there was a text conversation between Sheriff Stines and some of his employees with the Sheriff's Office.
DEFENSE - And that was an additional phone of Sheriff Stines?
DETECTIVE - It was phone of.. I guess she's the, I don't know what her title is, but she's employed. She's not sworn, she's employed by the Letcher County Sheriff's office, and she voluntarily gave her phone to the person that interviewed her.
DEFENSE - Okay, and just out of curiosity could you explain why that was relevant of germane to your investigation?
DETECTIVE - I didn't conduct that interview, but it was, I guess it was regarding the dinner at StreetSide and things that led up to the shooting, but I don't have those results either, so I don't know exactly what was said.
DEFENSE - Correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought when we discussed that earlier, that you indicated there was no evidence that the conversations at the lunch...
DETECTIVE - I haven't... I haven't seen those conversations yet, I've not received the downloads from the phone.
DEFENSE - Right, but I asked you if you're aware of any information that could be gleaned from witnesses at that meeting and, as I recall, you said no, but there is some information that something was discussed at this lunch - is that correct?
DETECTIVE - I don't know what was discussed at lunch.
DEFENSE - I understand but you obtained this lady, that we don't know her name, you obtained her phone in an effort... or based on a belief, that she would be able to demonstrate what was said at lunch, so you would agree with me, you believe there is a witness, or information that may have popped up at lunch?
DETECTIVE - There's a recorded interview with her in the case and I'm yet to receive the downloads of the phone, so I don't know what they contain.
DEFENSE - Has that phone been sent to forensic examination as well?
DETECTIVE - It is, yes.
(Redirect)
PROSECUTOR - (inaudible, but I believe he asks about the Judge's body being sent to the medical examiner)
DETECTIVE - He was.
PROSECUTOR - Have you received that report yet?
DETECTIVE - No.
PROSECUTOR - Have you had an informal conversation with him, regarding cause of death?
DETECTIVE - Yes.
PROSECUTOR - And what was that?
DETECTIVE - Multiple gunshot wounds.
PROSECUTOR - The video we showed earlier, is that a true and accurate copy of what you received?
DETECTIVE - Yes.
PROSECUTOR - (inaudible, but I believe he asks for the video to be entered into evidence)
(Defense objects and asks that the entire video be submitted. Judge rules against it and only the clip shown in court is entered)
PROSECUTOR - Detective is this an ongoing investigation?
DETECTIVE - Yes it is.
PROSECUTOR - And as this ongoing investigation proceeds you will obviously be interviewing more people as necessary? submitting more evidence to the lab?
DETECTIVE - Yes.
(Witness is excused)
JUDGE - I'll find probable cause and bind this case over to the jury.
(Defense asks to make an argument)
DEFENSE - Murder under our statute, as the court knows, I'm not telling you anything you don't know, but if there is an issue as to extreme emotional disturbance, then there has to be some evidence that would rebut that, and specifically when I asked the witness today, (inaudible) evidence to rebut that this occurred as a direct result in the moment, this observation (inaudible) and I get it, it's just probable cause but I think they've established probable cause for manslaughter 1st but not murder. I've heard nothing that indicates that this is not an example of an extreme emotional disturbance relative to the (inaudible), any rate judge, respectively, I understand the court's previous ruling but I did want to address that.
PROSECUTOR - (inaudible) defense presented to this court today that the Judge was intentionally shot and killed.. shot multiple times by the Sheriff and there's probable cause to (inaudible).
JUDGE - Yeah I agree there's probable cause to proceed with the murder.
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 - Yes, sir, I did.
PROSECUTOR - And can you tell us on what date that was?
DETECTIVE - It was September 19th, 2024.
PROSECUTOR - In an investigation of that death, were you able to determine who killed Kevin Mullins?
DETECTIVE - Yes.
PROSECUTOR - And how were you able to do that?
DETECTIVE - Video surveillance footage.
PROSECUTOR - And did you retrieve that video surveillance footage?
DETECTIVE - I did.
(Prosecutor requests for video to be entered. Defense objects. Sidebar. Video is then played)
PROSECUTOR - Are you able to identify the people in the video?
DETECTIVE - That was Sheriff Mickey Stines and Judge Kevin Mullins.
PROSECUTOR - And officer, who had the firearm?
DETECTIVE - Sheriff Stines.
PROSECUTOR - And the Judge was also in his black robe?
DETECTIVE - Yes.
PROSECUTOR - Do you know what portion of the courthouse that is?
DETECTIVE - That is the judge's chambers.
PROSECUTOR - And where is that located at ... physically located?
DETECTIVE - In the Letcher County Courthouse.
PROSECUTOR - That's all I have your honor.
(Judges asks defense if they would like to cross examine the witness)
DEFENSE - That was a short clip that was played there, how long do you believe that clip was?
DETECTIVE - That we just watched?
DEFENSE - Yes.
DETECTIVE - Just 10 seconds, 15 seconds.
DEFENSE - In fact, the video that was taken in the Judge's chambers between the meeting between Sheriff Stines and Judge Mullins, it's my understanding, that video lasted much longer, correct?
DETECTIVE - Yes.
DEFENSE - Okay, and have you had an opportunity to review the video of the prior incident?
DETECTIVE - I have.
DEFENSE - And can you describe for us what happened immediately prior to the clip that we saw?
DETECTIVE - Sheriff Stines' uses his telephone to make some phone calls, he then borrows Judge Mullens' cell phone, and appears to make a call on that, and that led to what you just saw.
DEFENSE - Okay, so it's my understanding there were some people who were having a meeting with Judge Mullens prior to the Sheriff's entry into the chambers - is that correct?
DETECTIVE - Yes.
DEFENSE - Have you identified those witnesses?
DETECTIVE - I don't know the names of them. There's about approximately four people in there, then Sheriff Stines enters the Judge's chambers, and everybody else clears out.
DEFENSE - You don't know their names?
DETECTIVE - Not right off, no.
DEFENSE - Have you prepared a report?
DETECTIVE - I am in the process, yes.
DEFENSE - You're in the process of preparing a report?
DETECTIVE - Yes, a lot of information.
DEFENSE - But you've not spoken to any of those witnesses?
DETECTIVE - Not directly, but they've all been interviewed. There's recorded interviews of those people in the case.
DEFENSE - Okay, so other officers have spoken with those four witnesses?
DETECTIVE - Yes.
DEFENSE - And what is your understanding of what those four witnesses have said?
DETECTIVE - I don't recall.
DEFENSE - You have no idea what they said?
DETECTIVE - No.
DEFENSE - I want to make sure I understand, had there been a hearing previously, this day, in chambers?
DETECTIVE - In the courtroom?
DEFENSE - No, in chambers?
DETECTIVE - Not that I'm aware of.
DEFENSE - And so there's a video camera that is running in the District Judge's chambers - is that on all the time?
DETECTIVE - It's my understanding, yes.
DEFENSE - Have you spoken with anyone about why that may be?
DETECTIVE - No, I mean, there's cameras throughout the courthouse.
DEFENSE - Well, fair enough, but are you familiar with District Judges chambers, normally? how they're set up?
DETECTIVE - No, I mean, some of them have video surveillance and some don't.
DEFENSE - Right, but generally when they have surveillance, you agree with me that that is utilized when there is a proceeding going on in chambers, correct?
DETECTIVE - It could be, yes.
DEFENSE - I'm just asking, so this video didn't have an audio recording to it?
DETECTIVE - There's no audio.
DEFENSE - Outside of the... what's the four people that were inside, that we don't know their names - once these four people had left the chambers, were they in an area adjacent where they could hear anything that was going on?
DETECTIVE - Yes, I believe some of them did remain in the next room.
DEFENSE - And what did they tell you?
DETECTIVE - Do I...?
DEFENSE - What did they hear?
DETECTIVE - I've not been part.. I wasn't part of those interviews.
DEFENSE - Okay, so if I'm understanding correctly you're preparing for a preliminary hearing on a murder and there are witnesses in an adjacent room....
DETECTIVE - They heard gunshots.
DEFENSE - So you are investigating a murder and testifying at a preliminary hearing, and there are witnesses who may have overheard what preceded this edited clip, yet you can't tell us today anything that they said?
DETECTIVE - I've not personally listened to those interviews. I've talked to the other officers that did those interviews.
DEFENSE - Fair enough. I mean, we're here at a preliminary hearing, as you know, you can testify to hearsay, I'm asking what they said.
DETECTIVE - They heard gunshots.
DEFENSE - Okay. Was there any statements that they overheard?
DETECTIVE - No.
DEFENSE - Were there raised voices?
DETECTIVE - There... one person stated that she heard... she didn't recognize him as being Judge Mullens' voice, but heard somebody say 'help, help'.
DEFENSE - Presumably, that will be after the firearm was drawn or shot?
(Prosecutor objects, defense withdraws question)
DEFENSE - So is there any testimony that you can give us today about any statements or arguments or the content of that argument prior to the shooting?
DETECTIVE - No.
DEFENSE - So I want to ask generally so - did you process the scene? are you the lead investigator on this case?
DETECTIVE - I am.
DEFENSE - Okay, so as a lead investigator, I would presume that you would have secured the chambers and evidence once you arrived?
DETECTIVE - I was part of that, yes.
DEFENSE - You were a part of it, right, but you're the lead investigator so you'd be in charge of those duties, delegating what should be done - is that fair?
DETECTIVE - No, I don't delegate what's done.
DEFENSE - Okay, so you're the lead investigator - what does that mean?
DETECTIVE - I'm the case officer.
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.
DEFENSE - Okay, all right, who was the first person to arrive on behalf of law enforcement to investigate?
DETECTIVE - They were already in the courthouse.
DEFENSE - Fair enough, but I'm talking about in terms of people that we may see a report from or take part in this investigation. Who would be the first?
DETECTIVE - I believe Trooper Jason Bates was the first KSP personnel on scene.
DEFENSE - And you spoke with him and he..
DETECTIVE - I did.
DEFENSE - And he searched and did not locate a firearm?
DETECTIVE - No, he didn't search the scene, no. His role at that point was security at the scene.
DEFENSE - I understand, but I'm just trying to ascertain if there was a firearm found?
DETECTIVE - No.
DEFENSE - Was it specifically searched for, a firearm?
DETECTIVE - In the Judge's chambers?
DEFENSE - Yes sir.
DETECTIVE - There was myself, Detective Chris Collins, Detective Scott (?), Detective Eric Caldwell, that's all I recall right now.
DEFENSE - Okay, so I'm trying to understand, who searched specifically for a firearm?
DETECTIVE - We all did.
DEFENSE - And that was specifically something you looked for?
DETECTIVE - Yes.
DEFENSE - Fair enough. In the course of your investigation did you ascertain that if prior in the day there had been a lunch meeting between Sheriff Stines and Judge Mullens?
DETECTIVE - There was.
DEFENSE - Where did this take place?
DETECTIVE - It's a restaurant called SteetSide and it's just down the street from the courthouse.
DEFENSE - And, it's my understanding there were a couple of other people who attended the luncheon?
DETECTIVE - There were several, yes.
DEFENSE - And at some point after that they wrapped up lunch and left, obviously, and went back to the courthouse. Are you aware of anything, so far in your investigation, that would tell us that there was any issues at lunch between Judge Mullens...
DETECTIVE - No.
DEFENSE - ...and Sheriff Stines?
DETECTIVE - No.
DEFENSE - Has someone on behalf of the KSP spoken to those witnesses?
DETECTIVE - Yes, they've all been interviewed.
DEFENSE - And there was nothing unusual that had arisen during that luncheon?
DETECTIVE - I was told that the Judge made a statement to Mickey about 'do we need to meet private in my chambers?' That's all I was told.
DEFENSE - Do you know the context of what the conversation was that they would need to discuss in chambers?
DETECTIVE - I do not.
DEFENSE - So it's my understanding that in the larger portion of the video, that we haven't had access to, that there is a point when Sheriff Stines asked for... to see the telephone of Judge Mullens?
DETECTIVE - Yes.
DEFENSE - Is that a yes?
DETECTIVE - Yes.
DEFENSE - And I would presume that you and the other officers you mentioned - when you secured the scene, that you secured those phones as well, is that correct?
DETECTIVE - Yes.
DEFENSE - And have you reviewed both of those phones?
DETECTIVE - They're currently at the forensic lab at this time, being downloaded. I have had discussions with the people at the lab regarding the downloads.
DEFENSE - And those are a couple other questions I want to ask you, but my original question was - have you reviewed or are you aware of the content of the phones?
DETECTIVE - I've not personally seen it because I've not received those reports yet.
DEFENSE - Again, based upon your conversation with the officers, are you aware of any recent content that was up and could have been relevant at the time of their discussion?
DETECTIVE - I was told that Sheriff Stines had tried to call his daughter, and he had tried to call his daughter from the Judge's phone also.
DEFENSE - So, have you obtained the phone records from Judge Mullens' phone?
DETECTIVE - I don't have those in my possession yet, no.
DEFENSE - Have you issued a search warrant for those?
DETECTIVE - Yes, yes.
DEFENSE - And have officers confirmed that the Sheriff's daughter's phone number was on Judge Mullens' phone?
DETECTIVE - Yes.
DEFENSE - So that number had been called from Judge Mullens' phone?
DETECTIVE - Yes.
DEFENSE - So, we don't have a viewing of what transpired during that exchange of phones, but based upon your review of those moments prior to when Sheriff Stines observes that cell phone is it... was he previously seated?
DETECTIVE - Yes.
DEFENSE - Okay, so when we saw him he was standing the entire time.
DETECTIVE - He was seated in front of the Judge's desk.
DEFENSE - And when he looks at the cell phone - what is... can you describe his reaction in the video we haven't seen?
DETECTIVE - Whose reaction?
DEFENSE - The Sheriff.
DETECTIVE - You can't see his face in the video.
DEFENSE - Okay, but is it clear that.. does it appear to you that.. let me rephrase this - did he stand up after looking at the phone?
DETECTIVE - Yes, he stood up.
DEFENSE - And how long after he looked at the cell phone and stood up did this occur before what you played.
DETECTIVE - Just seconds.
DEFENSE - Did you make the decision on edits today for what you were going to present? Did you make the edit to determine which portion of the video we were going to see today?
DETECTIVE - No sir, I did not.
DEFENSE - Both cell phones have been sent to the State Police Forensic team, is that correct?
DETECTIVE - Yes.
DEFENSE - Have you gotten any early report on what was found?
DETECTIVE - No.
DEFENSE - Were both phones still on the desk when you arrived?
DETECTIVE - The Judge's phone was on the desk, Sheriff Stines' phone was on his person.
DEFENSE - So are there photographs of... was the phone unlocked at that point, or was it still open?
DETECTIVE - Are you asking about both of them?
DEFENSE - Well first let's talk about.. first I'm talking about Judge Mullins' since his was the one that was still on the desk, and presumably nobody touched it right prior to you securing it, correct?
DETECTIVE - No, no.
DEFENSE - Yeah so I'd like to know about that, have you ascertained what was currently open on that cell phone?
DETECTIVE - No, I don't know at this point, no.
DEFENSE - You don't know?
DETECTIVE - No.
DEFENSE - Do you think that would be.. do you think that would be important to learn?
DETECTIVE - I hope to learn that when the reports ready, yes.
DEFENSE - But as of today you can't tell us what was currently open on the Judge's phone?
DETECTIVE - No sir.
DEFENSE - Did you conduct an interview with Sheriff Stine's daughter?
DETECTIVE - I did not but she has been interviewed.
DEFENSE - Are you aware of... who was present when she was being interviewed?
DETECTIVE - Lieutenant Randy Combs and Detective Anthony Trotter.
DEFENSE - And she was interviewed with or without her parent.
DETECTIVE - With.
DEFENSE - So her parent was present at the time you interviewed her?
DETECTIVE - Yes I believe. I wasn't there, but yes, I think so.
DEFENSE - Law enforcement has not spoken to her without her parent present?
DETECTIVE - Not that I'm aware of.
DEFENSE - Did state police obtain her phone?
DETECTIVE - No.
DEFENSE - Do you intend to intended obtain records for her cell phone number?
DETECTIVE - Possibly, yes.
DEFENSE - Do you believe that that would be soon that you'll do that?
DETECTIVE - Could be, yes.
DEFENSE - Had you ever intended to do that or did you just... respond to my question?
DETECTIVE - Well, the call should be on the Judge's records too and she's made statements about what occurred during those conversations.
DEFENSE - I understand that but I would presume that.. have you ascertained whether Judge Mullens also had apps that stand outside of phone records?
DETECTIVE - I've not received those records yet, I don't know what's on the phone.
DEFENSE - Fair enough, but I mean did you look at the phone? did it appear there were apps on it?
DETECTIVE - I'm not the person that's qualified to look through the phone.
DEFENSE - Okay, but you're familiar with a cell phone, they can host other forms of communication.
(Objection from prosecutor as to asked and answered. Judge says he can testify to any personal knowledge he has)
DEFENSE - So you're aware that phones can be used for apps, such as Facebook?
DETECTIVE - Yes.
DEFENSE - Okay, and that is not something that is captured by cell phone records - you'd agree with me?
DETECTIVE - I agree.
DEFENSE - So, in light of that, although the records may be mutually the same... the same between Judge Mullens' phone and the Sheriff's daughter do you believe that you could also ascertain other information from a cell phone app content?
DETECTIVE - Are you asking what apps are on the phone?
DEFENSE - Yes, well that was my original question..
DETECTIVE - Well, I don't about... I've not received that report yet. I don't know what apps he had downloaded on the phone.
DEFENSE - If he has social media apps do you intend to....
DETECTIVE - That could lead to additional search warrants, yes.
DEFENSE - Had you determined whether there were any previous issues, personal or professional between Sheriff Stines and Judge Mullens?
DETECTIVE - I've heard things.
DEFENSE - What have you heard?
DETECTIVE - Just that this... just regarding the lawsuit that Letcher County Sheriff's office is currently involved with.
DEFENSE - The lawsuit that involved, ultimately, the criminal conviction of a deputy for sexual behaviour in the Judge's chambers, is that the one you're referring to?
DETECTIVE - Yes.
DEFENSE - The subject matter of that lawsuit, the chambers area, that's the same chambers in which this occurred, is that correct?
DETECTIVE - I'm not familiar with the details of that case... the lawsuit resulted from
DEFENSE - Are you aware of any criminal reports that Sheriff Stines had made of Judge Mullens prior to this day?
DETECTIVE - No.
DEFENSE - Did you personally observe Sheriff Stines, following this video?
DETECTIVE - Did I personally observe him what?
DEFENSE - Did you meet with him? did you talk to him after.... ?
DETECTIVE - He was in custody when I arrived at the courthouse that afternoon.
DEFENSE - And at some point, did you draw any observations as to his demeanour?
DETECTIVE - He was mostly calm, I thought, I mean, I talked to him, but not... he didn't say nothing about why this had happened, but he was calm. He was kind of afraid that... basically all he said was 'treat me fair', that's basically the comments he made.
DEFENSE - Did he also make a statement about... I didn't see it in the citation, somewhere along the lines of a statement being true to him about protecting his family?
DETECTIVE - He was.. I wasn't present, but when he.. when he was taken into custody, I was told by one of the other officers that were there, that he made a comment 'they're trying to kidnap my wife and kid'.
DEFENSE - Have you ascertained any evidence that this shooting was pre-planned?
DETECTIVE - No, not at this time.
DEFENSE - And would you agree that, from what we've seen so far, the evidence you've seen so far, the shooting was a reaction to what was on that cell phone in that moment, is that accurate?
(Prosecutor objects as calls for speculation and outside scope of these proceedings. Judge sustains objection)
DEFENSE - So is there anything other than the content of the phone, if this video will reveal to us about why this took place?
DETECTIVE - No.
DEFENSE - Does it appear that this took place as a reaction to what was happening in the chambers at that point?
DETECTIVE - I can say it occurred after a phone call was made. I don't know what was said or nothing like that, but...
DEFENSE - Fair enough, and I'm not asking you the content of any of that but, at this point, is it your theory that whatever that content was and the discussion, was that the impetus of the shooting?
DETECTIVE - It could be but I don' know that for a fact.
DEFENSE - Okay, do you have any evidence, up until this point, that you have developed that would demonstrate that it was not as reaction to what was on the phone?
DETECTIVE - No.
DEFENSE - None whatsoever?
DETECTIVE - No.
DEFENSE - Did you attempt to speak to Sheriff Stines at the Leslie County jail after the incident?
DETECTIVE - No.
DEFENSE - Did anyone from your agency attempt to interview him?
DETECTIVE - Not to my knowledge, no.
DEFENSE - At and that point, have you asserted his right to an attorney or anything?
DETECTIVE - No.
DEFENSE - Nobody went back and tried to talk to him or do an interview?
DETECTIVE - No.
DEFENSE - I think I have one other question, in addition to cell phones that we discussed, the cell phone of Sheriff Stines and the cell phone that you found of Sheriff Mullens' were there additional phones that you were able to obtain?
DETECTIVE - There was one other phone that's currently being examined, and the basic reason it was seized was there was a text conversation between Sheriff Stines and some of his employees with the Sheriff's Office.
DEFENSE - And that was an additional phone of Sheriff Stines?
DETECTIVE - It was phone of.. I guess she's the, I don't know what her title is, but she's employed. She's not sworn, she's employed by the Letcher County Sheriff's office, and she voluntarily gave her phone to the person that interviewed her.
DEFENSE - Okay, and just out of curiosity could you explain why that was relevant of germane to your investigation?
DETECTIVE - I didn't conduct that interview, but it was, I guess it was regarding the dinner at StreetSide and things that led up to the shooting, but I don't have those results either, so I don't know exactly what was said.
DEFENSE - Correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought when we discussed that earlier, that you indicated there was no evidence that the conversations at the lunch...
DETECTIVE - I haven't... I haven't seen those conversations yet, I've not received the downloads from the phone.
DEFENSE - Right, but I asked you if you're aware of any information that could be gleaned from witnesses at that meeting and, as I recall, you said no, but there is some information that something was discussed at this lunch - is that correct?
DETECTIVE - I don't know what was discussed at lunch.
DEFENSE - I understand but you obtained this lady, that we don't know her name, you obtained her phone in an effort... or based on a belief, that she would be able to demonstrate what was said at lunch, so you would agree with me, you believe there is a witness, or information that may have popped up at lunch?
DETECTIVE - There's a recorded interview with her in the case and I'm yet to receive the downloads of the phone, so I don't know what they contain.
DEFENSE - Has that phone been sent to forensic examination as well?
DETECTIVE - It is, yes.
(Redirect)
PROSECUTOR - (inaudible, but I believe he asks about the Judge's body being sent to the medical examiner)
DETECTIVE - He was.
PROSECUTOR - Have you received that report yet?
DETECTIVE - No.
PROSECUTOR - Have you had an informal conversation with him, regarding cause of death?
DETECTIVE - Yes.
PROSECUTOR - And what was that?
DETECTIVE - Multiple gunshot wounds.
PROSECUTOR - The video we showed earlier, is that a true and accurate copy of what you received?
DETECTIVE - Yes.
PROSECUTOR - (inaudible, but I believe he asks for the video to be entered into evidence)
(Defense objects and asks that the entire video be submitted. Judge rules against it and only the clip shown in court is entered)
PROSECUTOR - Detective is this an ongoing investigation?
DETECTIVE - Yes it is.
PROSECUTOR - And as this ongoing investigation proceeds you will obviously be interviewing more people as necessary? submitting more evidence to the lab?
DETECTIVE - Yes.
(Witness is excused)
JUDGE - I'll find probable cause and bind this case over to the jury.
(Defense asks to make an argument)
DEFENSE - Murder under our statute, as the court knows, I'm not telling you anything you don't know, but if there is an issue as to extreme emotional disturbance, then there has to be some evidence that would rebut that, and specifically when I asked the witness today, (inaudible) evidence to rebut that this occurred as a direct result in the moment, this observation (inaudible) and I get it, it's just probable cause but I think they've established probable cause for manslaughter 1st but not murder. I've heard nothing that indicates that this is not an example of an extreme emotional disturbance relative to the (inaudible), any rate judge, respectively, I understand the court's previous ruling but I did want to address that.
PROSECUTOR - (inaudible) defense presented to this court today that the Judge was intentionally shot and killed.. shot multiple times by the Sheriff and there's probable cause to (inaudible).
JUDGE - Yeah I agree there's probable cause to proceed with the murder.
