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

[Friday Fan]

Imo, whilst the defense attorney here plys some mysterious innuendo re an expected outcome of manslaughter or even ( what the...?) an acquittal (!), moo in reality all he's doing is trying to twist direct evidence of first degree murder into a pretzel.

I read some posts here opining that the 'extreme emotional disturbance' defense in Kentucky is the equivalent of 'the 'crime of passion' defense in other States. If that is correct, then I don't see such a defense fitting the direct evidence; that being real time video showing said sheriff's calculated shooting murder of an non threatening, non weopen wielding man. Moo

Imo, the fact that the alleged murderer is an officer of the law makes their actions even more heinous. Vigilantism is unjustified and unlawful, something a person entrusted as sheriff must know and must be expected to uphold. Jmo.

INAL or even an American so my opinion is uninformed, but I think ultimately the best defense for Sheriff Stines might be some sort of 'not guilty by reason of insanity'. I don't know if that sort of defense is possible in Kentucky, nor obviously if it would even have a half a chance of succeeding from defendant's POV. Imo, it's not really going to be possible to argue away the direct evidence of calculated murder Alternately, maybe Stine's counsel will come to his senses ( moo) and advise him to plead guilty and strike a deal (if one was to be offered down the track). All moo.

In this case above where a police officer murdered his estranged wife (who was a judge) in her chambers, he blamed it on being drunk and the victim. He was convicted of manslaughter.

Fortunately, he had stiffer charges because he shot at law enforcement afterward.

 

[CrimeJunkie82]

Im new to this particular case. Since he kept say that they were trying to kidnap his wife and kids, has anyone looked into whether or not his wife may have been having an affair with the victim or if the victim was helping his wife and kids to leave him?

 

[Friday Fan]

Im new to this particular case. Since he kept say that they were trying to kidnap his wife and kids, has anyone looked into whether or not his wife may have been having an affair with the victim or if the victim was helping his wife and kids to leave him?

No one knows.

 

[Deleted member 39678]

Under the Model Penal Code rule, the one used in Kentucky courts, an individual will not be responsible for a criminal act if, at the time of the criminal act, the individual was suffering from such a mental disease or defect that there was no substantial capacity to understand or appreciate the criminal nature of the conduct or to comply with the requirements of the law.

Not sure if an insanity defense would work in this case. Stines seemed to have appreciated the criminal nature of his conduct because he surrendered to LE after shooting Mullins.

The Insanity Defense | Dickman Law Office

 

[justtrish]

Yes @Seattle1 and also @Leilei ….. I too am confused by the public defender’s statements. And also by the prosecutor’s deliberate playing in open court of the unfiltered video of the shooting. Almost beginning to wonder if there is some effort afoot to ‘throw’ or cloud the case? It is shameful IMO. Perhaps a gag order is needed in this case. Little if any respect given for the victim regardless of the circumstances.

No matter what had occurred previously, real, perceived, or imagined, nothing IMO - nothing - provides an excuse, reason, or justification for what MS did to the judge. Nothing. Period.

IIRC there was also earlier speculation up thread (which I won’t be able to readily find) that perhaps the shooter MS might have recently lost weight, or possibly had medical or other reasons for his having supposedly lost considerable weight? Viewing some stills from that in chambers shooting of the judge by MS it doesn’t seem that the suspect is thin by any means. MOO

BBM - I think in this case of a small town where everyone likely knew everyone or knew of them, showing the video would help stop the wild crazy rumors about what exactly occurred. I think seeing that moment that shows the sheriff shooting the judge could put to rest all the speculation about how it happened or if it happened so they could move forward with at least everyone knowing that in fact yes he did shoot him. Now to sort out why is something else entirely, but maybe since it was such a small town and involving a LEO, then it's similar to releasing body came footage ASAP.. it it an attempt to be transparent because this was the sheriff.

 

[jepop]

Not sure if an insanity defense would work in this case. Stines seemed to have appreciated the criminal nature of his conduct because he surrendered to LE after shooting Mullins.

The Insanity Defense | Dickman Law Office

Agree from what I can gather. Additionally, imo he would have a hard time proving he was 'insane' immediately before and during commission of the murder. Presenting evidence of recent paranoia for e.g., would likely not suffice jmo. Ultimately my opinion is there is no defense.

Speculating and moo only; he might give insanity a shot ( if court were to find a basis for it) and fail with dedicated prosecution rebuttal and impartial jury. I think his best option is to plead guilty. Jmo

 

[jepop]

No matter what had occurred previously, real, perceived, or imagined, nothing IMO - nothing - provides an excuse, reason, or justification for what MS did to the judge. Nothing. Period.

Respectfully snipped above. @I am not Sherlock H. I totally agree.

 

[katydid23]

Im new to this particular case. Since he kept say that they were trying to kidnap his wife and kids, has anyone looked into whether or not his wife may have been having an affair with the victim or if the victim was helping his wife and kids to leave him?

The judge was allegedly happily married with his own family. I don't see any evidence that he planned to run off with Mrs Stines.

 

[Deleted member 39678]

Here's the Kentucky statute on "Mental illness or intellectual disability" 504.020.

(1) A person is not responsible for criminal conduct if at the time of such conduct, as a result of mental illness or intellectual disability, he lacks substantial capacity either to appreciate the criminality of his conduct or to conform his conduct to the requirements of law.

(2) As used in this chapter, the term "mental illness or intellectual disability" does not include an abnormality manifested only by repeated criminal or otherwise antisocial conduct.

(3) A defendant may prove mental illness or intellectual disability, as used in this section, in exculpation of criminal conduct.

Section (1) has this, "or to conform his conduct to the requirements of law." Does that apply to this case? Can the defense say that Stines had some kind of illness or disability that made him unable to conform with the law? JMO.

Section 504.020 - Mental illness or intellectual disability, Ky. Rev. Stat. § 504.020 | Casetext Search + Citator

 

[Boxer]

Without knowing Stines' motive, it's almost impossible to know which way to go with this.
Clearly, Stines had some kind of monumental issue with Mullins. Enough to gun him down in cold blood.

What we don't know, is if the issue was due to something Stines was caught up in.
Although murdering a man in broad daylight seems counter-intuitive.
Whatever consequences may have been coming if Stines was involved in something shady would almost certainly be less severe than the consequences for murder. And being a law man, he'd know that better than anyone. Although if "extreme emotional disturbance" is legit, that might toss rational thought out the window.
Or if this awful issue was something that at least Stines believed Mullins was involved in, that he (Stines) thought was deserving of what transpired in the judge's chambers.

I appreciate what defense attorney Jeremy Bartley says here about seeing the entire video (not the edited one the public saw) and the other evidence, that can put that edited video into context to get the full story. He believes the highest level of culpability should be manslaughter, and explains why: based upon the facts they know so far manslaughter should be the ceiling. While he intends to mount a full defense and admits that extreme emotional disturbance is only a partial defense, he intends to pair that with another defense and go for a FULL aquital.

MOO
It literally doesn't matter.
He could have stopped himself, which makes it intentional murder, going back for a second barrage makes that clear.

The law is about not taking your own revenge. He decided to kill for a possibly an understandable motive, but just because a thing is "understandable" does not make it something other than it is.
All murderers are "disturbed" by something. So the reason is properly placed durong mitigation phase at sentencing, like mental illness is.
Death row prisoners almost all feel they were "driven" to their murdering, in other words that they were the true "victim."
Defense attoneys try to embellish this concept to a full defense and lessening of charges.

Stines is going to play the victim card like all criminals.

MOO a policeman taking on the role of judge and executioner needs the whole book thrown at him.

 

[worm]

No one knows.

This says so much about our understanding of this.

 

[Ontario Mom]

MOO
It literally doesn't matter.
He could have stopped himself, which makes it intentional murder, going back for a second barrage makes that clear.

The law is about not taking your own revenge. He decided to kill for a possibly an understandable motive, but just because a thing is "understandable" does not make it something other than it is.
All murderers are "disturbed" by something. So the reason is properly placed durong mitigation phase at sentencing, like mental illness is.
Death row prisoners almost all feel they were "driven" to their murdering, in other words that they were the true "victim."
Defense attoneys try to embellish this concept to a full defense and lessening of charges.

Stines is going to play the victim card like all criminals.

MOO a policeman taking on the role of judge and executioner needs the whole book thrown at him.

I was specifically referring to how his defense attorney is going to play this, according to his own words which I linked in the post. Stines' motive, additional evidence, etc. does matter in how he'll be defended & the intention to have this case aquitted despite what we all saw on video.

jmo

 

[Boxer]

I was specifically referring to how his defense attorney is going to play this, according to his own words which I linked in the post. Stines' motive, additional evidence, etc. does matter in how he'll be defended & the intention to have this case aquitted despite what we all saw on video.

jmo

No offense intended.
I mean outside of carefully crafted legal arguments his reasons are basically meaningless.

His life work as a sheriff was to take the authority of delivering justice (revenge) from individuals and moving it to the system.
He knows more deeply than the average person that taking justice in his hands is straight up murder.

MOO he is in a special category of perpetrator.

 

[Ontario Mom]

So let's (i.e., the defense) promote the delusion until the commonwealth gives us something else?

I think Mullins deserves better than this. The shooter here isn't the only man who "served his community honorably"! MOO

As much as I don't care for defense attorneys at all, I have no reason to believe the defense is knowingly promoting a delusion. I suggested the motive could have been due to a delusion on Stines' part but we really don't know, yet. I tend to lean toward it not being a delusion at all, but simply unchecked rage.

I do however have reason to believe the defense knows a lot more than the public does, and that's what has informed his line of defense. The full video in context, the additional evidence he says exists, the extreme emotional distress as well as a secondary defense he intentionally hasn't named yet. Whatever it is he knows, is what's directing him to push for a full aquittal, and that's kind of a big deal, considering the world already saw what Stines did.

It'll be interesting to say the least, when we finally learn what the motive was, and what that additional evidence is.

jmo

 

[Ontario Mom]

No offense intended.
I mean outside of carefully crafted legal arguments his reasons are basically meaningless.

His life work as a sheriff was to take the authority of delivering justice (revenge) from individuals and moving it to the system.
He knows more deeply than the average person that taking justice in his hands is straight up murder.

MOO he is in a special category of perpetrator.

No offense taken. I think I mostly agree that outside of legalese, it doesn't matter.
He still murdered a man. No getting around that. "Mostly" I think it doesn't matter but only because I can think of a couple of reasons someone might lose their common sense & do what he did. In such cases, I think more folks might empathize, even though what he did was still unthinkable.

Which makes it even more profound that as a law man, he did in fact know better as you say, and did it anyway, consequences be damned.

Special category of perp to be sure.

 

[al66pine]

Breaks During Civil Depo?

Ten breaks at an hours-long depo, and per Plaintiff & atty's rep'ing her in a civil
case, Stines "frequently asked for breaks." *

I wonder:
- specifically, how many hours was the depo?
- were ALL ten breaks taken at depo requested by Stine himself? Or did the ten breaks include Stines' requested breaks plus breaks requested by OTHERS?
- Aside from Stines' "having an episode" did he state REASONS for his requests?
(ETA: Not that he was obligated to state a reason, afaik)
- How LONG was each break requested by Stines?
- How long were the breaks requested by others?
- Did court reporter note each break's starting & ending time?
- Was the depo video recorded?

Under typical conditions at a civil case depo, my understanding & IME is that
if the witness, atty's, court reporter (or some others present) requests a break, there's usually no objection.

________________________________
* "The plaintiff and her two attorneys said Stines appeared agitated during the hours-long deposition and frequently asked for breaks. At one point, Stines was asked whether he had authorized his deputy to use public equipment to manage the ankle monitors.
“I don’t recall,” said Stines. “ I am having an episode. Sorry.”
"Stines took another break, one of 10, according to the deposition."

^ Why was a Kentucky judge killed? So far, it remains a mystery

 

[gitana1]

Not sure if an insanity defense would work in this case. Stines seemed to have appreciated the criminal nature of his conduct because he surrendered to LE after shooting Mullins.

The Insanity Defense | Dickman Law Office

True. But Andrea Yates did as well. And she was later found not guilty by reason of insanity.

Don’t quote me but I believe the insanity test is likely similar in Kentucky, to the test in Texas.

Then there’s the question of whether diminished capacity is a mitgator and if so, what does that result in. I’m not sure if those questions have been answered. So I’m off to research.

 

[gitana1]

So far, I find that extreme emotional disturbance and a belief that one is morally justified, are both mitigating factors that could lead to a lesser sentence. (So life over a death sentence).

https://codes.findlaw.com/ky/title-l-kentucky-penal-code/ky-rev-st-sect-532-025/

 

[iamshadow21]

True. But Andrea Yates did as well. And she was later found not guilty by reason of insanity.

Don’t quote me but I believe the insanity test is likely similar in Kentucky, to the test in Texas.

Then there’s the question of whether diminished capacity is a mitgator and if so, what does that result in. I’m not sure if those questions have been answered. So I’m off to research.

Yates had a long, documented history of diagnosed mental illness. And even she got found guilty the first time around. What happened with her was heartbreakingly preventable, had she been given proper treatment and support. There is no way she could have been elected to any kind of office and maintained a position for years, as the sheriff did.

Now, yes, there are conditions that can come on fast. Tumours, for example. But if the defense is going to argue insanity, they're going to have to be able to show a whole bevy of competent, experienced witnesses who are willing to swear to the sheriff being demonstrably, unequivocally out of his mind when he committed this act. And I think it's going to be a hard bar for them to clear. He got the judge alone, he shot him until he was sure he was dead, and he surrendered. That, to me says he knew what he was doing, he knew that what he was doing would kill the judge, and he knew what he was doing was wrong. And if he knew all those things, then in most places, that means you don't meet the bar for legal insanity.

MOO

 

[Deleted member 39678]

True. But Andrea Yates did as well. And she was later found not guilty by reason of insanity.

Don’t quote me but I believe the insanity test is likely similar in Kentucky, to the test in Texas.

Then there’s the question of whether diminished capacity is a mitgator and if so, what does that result in. I’m not sure if those questions have been answered. So I’m off to research.

Thanks Gitana, I think that everyone will appreciate what your research finds.

I've found the Model Penal Code, The M'Naghten Rule, and the Irresistible Impulse Test to be a bit confusing. At least to this retired auto parts guy.