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

[Leilei]

I live confused! Joking aside I was referring to whatever they talked about at lunch that had to be talked about in private.

I don’t understand why the judge was allowing the sexual escapades in his chambers. That’s what I meant by ‘shady’ things.

If there is proof that the judge was "allowing" it, then I imagine that he, too, would be named in the civil suit. There's no evidence of that at all. IMO.

 

[al66pine]

Stamper's Testimony - Others Overhearing Mullins & Stines Argue?

@ around 29:00 on according to Dr. Michael Sterling on CourtTV, MS’ defense attorney’s questions and Stamper’s answers indicate that in addition to the woman who hears JM for help that there were others in the room with her who have also been interviewed, albeit not by Stamper, because they also heard parts of the conversation/raised voices in the chambers or parts of what was going on in the room next door.

@AppleTreeGreen Thx for your post which prompted me to watch vid.
Courtttv vid shows that Michael Sterling said def atty's Q's & detective Stamper's answers INDICATE others nearby heard Mullins & Stines arguing. That is Sterling’s OPINION based on “context clues, etc.” He also said Stamper was “intentionally vague.”
The ProbCause Hearing transcript quotes Stamper stmt that he had not yet listened to interview recordings, was in the process of preparing his report. In CX Q’s & A’s, both def atty & detective stumbled, bumbled, & fumbled somewhat, may have been confusing or misleading.

But the last Q & A clarifies that the detective has no testimony to give about the others overhearing issue that day. IOW not yet analyzed.
“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.”
That answer is understandable imo as the investigation was & still is subject to different conclusions as more evidence is collected & analyzed.
But worry not. Prosecution will provide defense w plenty of discovery, likely a boxcar-full (well, the digital equivalent ) so regardless of Sterling’s opinions, defense will have opportunity to review relevant info.

Did others overhear Mullins & Stines argue? My 2 cents? IDK.

For anyone interested in rearing or re-reading sources of ^quotes, see below –
- Courttv transcript w Sterling’s stmt on this point. W imperfect Speech-to-Text system, not easy to follow by reading. In watching vid & listening, I thought the vid’s StT there cleaned it up, so closed captions were more accurate, still not perfect.
- ProbCause Hearing transcript which @Allabouttrial (TYVM ) posted Oct 1& which @tlcya partially reposted, in red earlier yesterday.

COURTTV TRANSCRIPT
After Vinny said, there must be something more to this, Sterling speaks:
"28:50.... >> You know being you can take some context clues from the way to the defense attorney was questioning the lead investigator when he was asking him hey was there anybody within listening distance to wear her what happened just before the shots were fired, you're and he says yes there were some people work something but I and been involved in those interviews. I haven't spoken to them I don't know exactly what they're going to say they are for a guy being intentionally vague because if they had something to offer that could potentially midday is probable cause hearing. They're shielding the lead investigator away from that information because they want to make sure they get that they get the necessary probable cause. But it does seem like something Moore obviously is going on here and you know without speculating take context clues from the way the defense attorney was questioning the share of them for the lead investigator. The questions he was asking about the fall it can mimic was the phone number in the air basically and you know the vision authorities don't has questions they don't already know the answer to he knew that number was there he knew you know kuz client probably told so do you know it was something more here and so you take just those context clues from the cross-examination we know there's a lot more about that if the being alleged in count. >>”
^ End of that part of Sterling’s stmt on vid.

This ^ is what OP referenced & seems imo to be the most relevant section of vid where Sterling spoke re “others overhearing” question.
^

______________________________________

From PC HEARING TRANSCRIPT ....
“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 - 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.”
….”
^ Kentucky - Judge killed, sheriff arrested in Letcher County courthouse shooting - Sep. 19, 2024

 

[vls12345]

The judge and sheriff denied any knowledge of the crimes to which the now-former deputy pleaded guilty. It’s unclear if the case is connected to the shooting.

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

The one-of-a-kind killing of a Kentucky judge, allegedly by the local sheriff, has shaken tight-knit Letcher County, leaving people baffled and unnerved as police try to figure out a motive.

www.wboi.org

https://www.npr.org/2024/10/11/nx-s1-5138357/kentucky-sheriff-judge-shooting-stines-mullins-courthouse-letcher-daughter-murder-killing

“I don’t recall,” said Stines. “ I am having an episode. Sorry.”

Stines took another break, one of 10, according to the deposition.

I wonder what type of "episode" MS meant during the deposition?

An episode of...
anxiety?
forgetfulness?
jitters?
loss of concentration?
needing nicotine (or other)?
medical something?
???

Imo.

 

[Seattle1]

Jeremy Bartley, Stines’ attorney said on the cable channel Law & Crime that prosecutors will have to provide a motive at some point.

“Ultimately,” Bartley said, “the Commonwealth has to give us the information to understand what would make this man who has served so honorably in his community get to the point that he thought the only thing he could do to protect his wife and daughter was to take action on his own.”

Copyright 2024 NPR

 

[Deleted member 39678]

Will viewing to entire in chambers video tell us what exactly led to Stines shooting Mullins?

If there was audio we could hear what they said to each other and that would be valuable evidence. Without audio I'm not so sure. JMO.

 

[vls12345]

Do we know when the Grand Jury will be meeting and when to expect their decision?

 

[I am not Sherlock H.]

Jeremy Bartley, Stines’ attorney said on the cable channel Law & Crime that prosecutors will have to provide a motive at some point.

“Ultimately,” Bartley said, “the Commonwealth has to give us the information to understand what would make this man who has served so honorably in his community get to the point that he thought the only thing he could do to protect his wife and daughter was to take action on his own.”

Copyright 2024 NPR

I found one portion of that interesting …… and granted IANAL…..

RSBMFF: “Bartley, Stines’ attorney said on the cable channel Law & Crime that prosecutors will have to provide a motive at some point.”

IIUC while motive might be of interest, it was not my recollection that prosecutors would need to provide one. And if they found one and elected to indicate it, court filings, evidence, or testimony might be a more suitable venue for that to be revealed IMO. MOO

 

[Seattle1]

I found one portion of that interesting …… and granted IANAL…..

RSBMFF: “Bartley, Stines’ attorney said on the cable channel Law & Crime that prosecutors will have to provide a motive at some point.”

IIUC while motive might be of interest, it was not my recollection that prosecutors would need to provide one. And if they found one and elected to indicate it, court filings, evidence, or testimony might be a more suitable venue for that to be revealed IMO. MOO

Seems Stines defense attorney Bartley is saying the defense need do nothing because the burden of proof is on the prosecution. But Bartley seems to forget the prosecution has a video of Stines shooting Mullins that on its face, can prove beyond a reasonable doubt that he caused the death of Mullins. While a motive would be nice, they don't need one to convict.

Nonetheless, seems to me Bartley and Stines are sticking with blaming the shooting on a perceived threat of security of Stines wife and daughter, and for the reader to deduct the threat had to be by the victim, Mullins.

I dunno -- seems like a cheap shot to me. MOO

 

[Seattle1]

There was an earlier question here about the last reported equivalent shooting of a Judge, and two incidents are reported by NPR:

“This is definitely a unique case,” says David Carter, a professor at the Michigan State University School of Criminal Justice.

The nearest, modern equivalents occurred in 1988. That’s when a judge in Grand Rapids, Mich., was killed by her estranged husband, a veteran police officer.

The same year, a retired New York City police officer shot and killed a judge in Westchester County, after the judge dismissed a suit filed by the officer’s daughter.

Copyright 2024 NPR

 

[Ontario Mom]

Will viewing to entire in chambers video tell us what exactly led to Stines shooting Mullins?

If there was audio we could hear what they said to each other and that would be valuable evidence. Without audio I'm not so sure. JMO.

According to what the defense attorney said (link in my last post), it's the full video plus the other evidence they have that tells the full story. I tend to believe him.

Whether or not that "justifies" any sort of motive (in a moral sense, not a legal one) remains to be seen.

jmo

 

[Ontario Mom]

Seems Stines defense attorney Bartley is saying the defense need do nothing because the burden of proof is on the prosecution. But Bartley seems to forget the prosecution has a video of Stines shooting Mullins that on its face, can prove beyond a reasonable doubt that he caused the death of Mullins. While a motive would be nice, they don't need one to convict.

Nonetheless, seems to me Bartley and Stines are sticking with blaming the shooting on a perceived threat of security of Stines wife and daughter, and for the reader to deduct the threat had to be by the victim, Mullins.

I dunno -- seems like a cheap shot to me. MOO

It might be a cheap shot, afterall, he is a criminal defense attorney, and they're known for those.
However, until we know the motive we really can't say.
Honestly, this could be 10 times worse than any of us even suspect as this point.
Or, it could have been a massive delusion on Stines' part.
We just don't know yet.

jmo

 

[Friday Fan]

There was an earlier question here about the last reported equivalent shooting of a Judge, and two incidents are reported by NPR:

“This is definitely a unique case,” says David Carter, a professor at the Michigan State University School of Criminal Justice.

The nearest, modern equivalents occurred in 1988. That’s when a judge in Grand Rapids, Mich., was killed by her estranged husband, a veteran police officer.

The same year, a retired New York City police officer shot and killed a judge in Westchester County, after the judge dismissed a suit filed by the officer’s daughter.

Copyright 2024 NPR

OK..I had when was the last time in the last 100 years that law enforcement murdered a judge. Now I have my answer. It was 1988.

In the first case, it was a spouse who happened to be a judge. The outcome of that trial is sad. MOO The shooter had a bunch of defenders. (grhhh)

He faces a stiffer sentence for shooting and missing the police than for shooting and killing his wife.
The jurors decided that Ratcliff was under too much alcohol and
”stress” to intend murder.

NO ACCEPTABLE EXCUSE FOR MURDER

The second case, it was a retired officer who happened to be a the father of a plaintiff. (It was a murder-suicide)

Wounded by at least three of the shots, which caused major bleeding, Daronco attempted to escape into his house. Meanwhile, his wife, daughter, and a friend were in another part of the house. Hearing the gunshots, his wife entered the kitchen and found Koster chasing Daronco into the house. tried to barricade himself in his study, where he collapsed and died. Once inside the house, Koster killed himself with a fatal shot to the head.

The Federal Bureau of Investigation determined that Koster and his family had been "consumed with [the] litigation," which had become a "crusade" for them. Charles Koster had spent most of his life savings to continue his daughter's lawsuit, and his suicide note indicated the killing was vengeance for Daronco's ruling in the case. Richard J. Daronco - Wikipedia

 

[Seattle1]

It might be a cheap shot, afterall, he is a criminal defense attorney, and they're known for those.
However, until we know the motive we really can't say.
Honestly, this could be 10 times worse than any of us even suspect as this point.
Or, it could have been a massive delusion on Stines' part.
We just don't know yet.

jmo

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

 

[Leilei]

Will viewing to entire in chambers video tell us what exactly led to Stines shooting Mullins?

If there was audio we could hear what they said to each other and that would be valuable evidence. Without audio I'm not so sure. JMO.

Facial expressions and body language might help tell some of the story. The employee who turned their phone over for analysis is what I think will provide a big chunk of info as to Stine's state of mind that afternoon. IMO.

 

[Leilei]

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

Right?? The man can't defend himself. At what point does all of the speculation with no evidence become victim blaming? I'm seeing way too much of it, especially in SM. IMO.

 

[Deleted member 39678]

According to what the defense attorney said (link in my last post), it's the full video plus the other evidence they have that tells the full story. I tend to believe him.

Whether or not that "justifies" any sort of motive (in a moral sense, not a legal one) remains to be seen.

jmo

Yes. I'm talking only about the video. Without seeing the whole video it's impossible to say for certain what's in it and what it will tell us.

I have doubts about the value of it without having any audio. It could show an argument. But I doubt it will show us why there was an argument or what it was about. JMO.

 

[Deleted member 39678]

Facial expressions and body language might help tell some of the story. The employee who turned their phone over for analysis is what I think will provide a big chunk of info as to Stine's state of mind that afternoon. IMO.

The video could show us that Stines appeared to be angry. But will it show us why?

I agree that other evidence will go much further in showing a motive. JMO.

 

[Seattle1]

Facial expressions and body language might help tell some of the story. The employee who turned their phone over for analysis is what I think will provide a big chunk of info as to Stine's state of mind that afternoon. IMO.

Yes, those text messages! I'm eager to learn who/what the employee phone supports.

 

[I am not Sherlock H.]

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

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

 

[jepop]

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.

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.