Kentucky - Judge killed, sheriff arrested in Letcher County courthouse shooting - Sep. 19, 2024 # 3

[Deleted member 296739]

yes, the BBM. Totally agree on both counts. Any man who will do what he did with zero explanation or attempt to address whatever triggered him another way is a dangerous one IMO Who knows what threat he will perceive to his family next??

Stupid question alert—- How much does the judge know? Is the only thing she’s got the murder indictment? Or does she have more info when making her decision on bail?

 

[tlcya]

Stupid question alert—- How much does the judge know? Is the only thing she’s got the murder indictment? Or does she have more info when making her decision on bail?

I think she gets whatever the state put in front of her. Which tells us nothing, we don't even know what evidence was presented at the grand jury. We can presume they viewed the video tape of the murder, but who knows what if anything else was introduced. Because the defendant and defense doesn't automatically get to have a say before GJ, just the state.

I assume the judge will hear arguments at the arraignment for and against bail. But then you know what they say about assuming.

IANAL and am way more versed in elder law than criminal.

 

[Deleted member 296739]

I think she gets whatever the state put in front of her. Which tells us nothing, we don't even know what evidence was presented at the grand jury. We can presume they viewed the video tape of the murder, but who knows what if anything else was introduced. Because the defendant and defense doesn't automatically get to have a say before GJ, just the state.

I assume the judge will hear arguments at the arraignment for and against bail. But then you know what they say about assuming.

IANAL and am way more versed in elder law than criminal.

Sooo stay tuned, come back Monday and watch and see?

 

[OldAce]

yes, the BBM. Totally agree on both counts. Any man who will do what he did with zero explanation or attempt to address whatever triggered him another way is a dangerous one IMO Who knows what threat he will perceive to his family next??

Question, why do you think he would be dangerous and to whom. Nothing I have seen here indicates he goes around shooting people at random, nor has he revealed any further intent to do so. Just the two statement reported by KYSP
a request "Treat me fair" and the comment "They were/are trying to kidnap my wife and daughter". The first was probably a request for "no roughhousing in custody" as referring to his knowledge of sometime officers get there feeling irate over a legal official being killed and take it out on the one arrested. As for the ""they" who might be in some way connected with a threat to his wife and daughter, I think we will learn much more at trial.

 

[tlcya]

Question, why do you think he would be dangerous and to whom. Nothing I have seen here indicates he goes around shooting people at random, nor has he revealed any further intent to do so. Just the two statement reported by KYSP
a request "Treat me fair" and the comment "They were/are trying to kidnap my wife and daughter". The first was probably a request for "no roughhousing in custody" as referring to his knowledge of sometime officers get there feeling irate over a legal official being killed and take it out on the one arrested. As for the ""they" who might be in some way connected with a threat to his wife and daughter, I think we will learn much more at trial.

fair question. My answer is this:

We have no clue what caused him to do what he did. We know he claims to have perceived some threat to his wife and child based upon his own alleged words to officers who took him into custody. We know he claims "they" (plural) were trying to take or abduct his wife and child.

Who is to say he doesn't encounter or seek out an encounter with the rest of "they" while out on bail?

A long standing officer of the law, sheriff no less, who does what he did is a danger to EVERYONE IMO.

 

[vls12345]

fair question. My answer is this:

We have no clue what caused him to do what he did. We know he claims to have perceived some threat to his wife and child based upon his own alleged words to officers who took him into custody. We know he claims "they" (plural) were trying to take or abduct his wife and child.

Who is to say he doesn't encounter or seek out an encounter with the rest of "they" while out on bail?

A long standing officer of the law, sheriff no less, who does what he did is a danger to EVERYONE IMO.

Totally agree.

Who knows what triggered him in the first place? Who knows what ideas he may have concocted while sitting in jail recently? What if he decides other coworkers might have been in on "it" (whatever "it" is)? What if he decides his wife and/or daughter were complicit in whatever "it" was? What if he reads comments, hears local talk, etc. once he's out and he decides he doesn't like what he's hearing?

I don't know if this guy is crazy or just an ice cold murderer who thinks he's justified and sanctioned to carry out executions as he sees fit. Either way, I don’t think he needs to be running around in public. Period. Imo.

 

[OldAce]

fair question. My answer is this:

We have no clue what caused him to do what he did. We know he claims to have perceived some threat to his wife and child based upon his own alleged words to officers who took him into custody. We know he claims "they" (plural) were trying to take or abduct his wife and child.

Who is to say he doesn't encounter or seek out an encounter with the rest of "they" while out on bail?

A long standing officer of the law, sheriff no less, who does what he did is a danger to EVERYONE IMO.

Well, if there is a "They", and in some way did threaten his family. they should be very concerned.

I think we are at cross purposes here, It is settled he shot the judge. The judge is dead and buried.
LE and courts will go forward to try him and punish. I am not concerned with justification, or glorifying the judge.
My only interest is curiosity as to why he did it, his motive. Reviewing the related information that has been offered;
the family threats reference, the judges phone conversations with the daughter. There is either a very poorly processed investigation or a very smooth orchestrated theme of "move along-nothing to see here" being accomplished here.

Were I were he; and felt reasonably safe/secure/treated in the present confinement, I would not be concerned with bond. It is an expense, it puts me back in public approach by the media, and at risk IF there are facts concealed.
I would sit tight; with access to me restricted and listed to the present staff at this location. Keep them responsible.

 

[Seattle1]

Judge Adams was appointed solely for the purpose of receiving the indictment and presiding over the arraignment of Stines, which is set for Monday at noon.

Judge Adams also left room for Stines to be released from jail on bond, but warned the bond "will be significant." "I am disinclined to set 'no bond' in any case," the judge said.

Given Stines has never had a bond hearing, it follows that the Court has to officially declare Stines eligible for capital punishment on the record, and a proof evident presumption great hearing also held, before declaring him ineligible for pretrial bail release.

Pursuant to Section 16 of the Kentucky constitution:

All prisoners shall be bailable by sufficient securities, unless for capital offenses when the proof is evident or the presumption great;...

I'm reminded of Colorado where their State Constitution cites language similar to the KY bail provision above but when Colorado abolished the death penalty in 2020, the State Supreme Court ruled defendants charged with first degree murder were suddenly eligible for bail release because the term "capital offense" was closely associated with "death penalty," and therefore denying a murder defendant bail was deemed unconstitutional. The voters just passed Amendment I earlier this month to return judge's ability to deny bail to defendants charged with murder -- and/or remedy the unintended effect of abolishing the death penalty.

Following the Colorado Supreme Court Ruling -- for example, the district Court Judges self policed the problem by issuing bail for murders at $10M cash-only -- or terms high enough it was as good as "no bail."

Amendment I passes: Colorado judges can deny bail to people charged with first-degree murder

The ballot measure was an effort by state lawmakers to reverse an unintended consequences of a law passed in 2020 abolishing Colorado’s death penalty

coloradosun.com

$10 million cash-only bond for Colo dentist

 

[jepop]

Totally agree.

Who knows what triggered him in the first place? Who knows what ideas he may have concocted while sitting in jail recently? What if he decides other coworkers might have been in on "it" (whatever "it" is)? What if he decides his wife and/or daughter were complicit in whatever "it" was? What if he reads comments, hears local talk, etc. once he's out and he decides he doesn't like what he's hearing?

I don't know if this guy is crazy or just an ice cold murderer who thinks he's justified and sanctioned to carry out executions as he sees fit. Either way, I don’t think he needs to be running around in public. Period. Imo.

Hopefully the judge will get around this (appears from posts by @Seattle1 judge may be required to offer bail option) by setting a bond so high that no-one can post it. IE in the millions range? Guessing. Jmo

 

[jepop]

Given Stines has never had a bond hearing, it follows that the Court has to officially declare Stines eligible for capital punishment on the record, and a proof evident presumption great hearing also held, before declaring him ineligible for pretrial bail release.

Pursuant to Section 16 of the Kentucky constitution:

All prisoners shall be bailable by sufficient securities, unless for capital offenses when the proof is evident or the presumption great;...

I'm reminded of Colorado where their State Constitution cites language similar to the KY bail provision above but when Colorado abolished the death penalty in 2020, the State Supreme Court ruled defendants charged with first degree murder were suddenly eligible for bail release because the term "capital offense" was closely associated with "death penalty," and therefore denying a murder defendant bail was deemed unconstitutional. The voters just passed Amendment I earlier this month to return judge's ability to deny bail to defendants charged with murder -- and/or remedy the unintended effect of abolishing the death penalty.

Following the Colorado Supreme Court Ruling -- for example, the district Court Judges self policed the problem by issuing bail for murders at $10M cash-only -- or terms high enough it was as good as "no bail."

Amendment I passes: Colorado judges can deny bail to people charged with first-degree murder

The ballot measure was an effort by state lawmakers to reverse an unintended consequences of a law passed in 2020 abolishing Colorado’s death penalty

coloradosun.com

$10 million cash-only bond for Colo dentist

Yes, something like this, a cash bond in the millions, should keep the sheriff out of the community and the community safe from the sheriff. Moo

 

[Tricia]

Hey Everyone,
We do a livestream every night where we discuss true crime.
This case is by far one of the biggest topics on the broadcast.
If anyone is from the area and can speak to how people are feeling and what they are saying, please email me at [email protected]
Thank you very much,
Tricia

 

[Elley Mae]

Ky. sheriff faces death penalty on murder charge for allegedly killing longtime judge pal in his chambers

The murder charge could be eligible for the death penalty.

nypost.com

 

[tlcya]

Well, if there is a "They", and in some way did threaten his family. they should be very concerned.

I think we are at cross purposes here, It is settled he shot the judge. The judge is dead and buried.
LE and courts will go forward to try him and punish. I am not concerned with justification, or glorifying the judge.
My only interest is curiosity as to why he did it, his motive. Reviewing the related information that has been offered;
the family threats reference, the judges phone conversations with the daughter. There is either a very poorly processed investigation or a very smooth orchestrated theme of "move along-nothing to see here" being accomplished here.

Were I were he; and felt reasonably safe/secure/treated in the present confinement, I would not be concerned with bond. It is an expense, it puts me back in public approach by the media, and at risk IF there are facts concealed.
I would sit tight; with access to me restricted and listed to the present staff at this location. Keep them responsible.

I am still waiting for confirmation that conversations happened. The officer that testified at the initial hearing to determine if this was sent to GJ was less than forthcoming and his testimony was confusing. So much so that the KSP had to come out and issue a clarification about the phone call. So until something aside from that officer's statement about conversations tells me conversations happened between judge and the minor Stines, I don't know that. JMO

I do agree with you that there is a very strong "move it along here" vibe with this case but IME small southern towns keep to themselves and are not fans of national attention. When tragedy happens they close ranks and look after their own. It is simply how things often work in small town rural America (again JMO).

Without knowing what the perceived threat was, if it was based in reality, and who the other possible perpetrators of said threat are, Mickey should not be released. MOO the risk is too high for further bloodshed.

I agree that Mickey is best off to sit tight and plead his case without rejoining the community.

MIckey's attorney wants to say that this crime was committed due to extreme emotional disturbance. Okay, maybe it was. I don't believe that but let's say it was. Now he gets bail and returns to town to wait for his trial date.

What if someone in the Mullins family bumps into Stines on the street and has their own "extreme emotional disturbance" reaction to seeing him and shoots him down in broad daylight?

 

[Ontario Mom]

MIckey's attorney wants to say that this crime was committed due to extreme emotional disturbance. Okay, maybe it was. I don't believe that but let's say it was. Now he gets bail and returns to town to wait for his trial date.

RSBM

I'm curious why you don't believe the defense attorney claim about this being a case of extreme emotional disturbance.
I have no idea if it was or not, but I haven't seen or heard anything else to point another direction. Have you?

Regardless, I don't think he should get bail anyway.

jmo

 

[tlcya]

RSBM

I'm curious why you don't believe the defense attorney claim about this being a case of extreme emotional disturbance.
I have no idea if it was or not, but I haven't seen or heard anything else to point another direction. Have you?

Regardless, I don't think he should get bail anyway.

jmo

I haven't seen any evidence of extreme emotional disturbance as yet while I have seen a sheriff shoot a seated unarmed man multiple times and turn back to deliver two final shots to assure his kill.

I've heard defense counsel suggest such a disturbance was the case. But I won't believe that until I have seen something which explains what the thing was that created the alleged emotional disturbance. It's really that simple. I tend to be leery of defense attorney statements. I respect they have a vital role to play in our justice system. But I personally mistrust them based on decades of following criminal trials. So I take everything they say as word salad until they serve me up some sort of evidence to accompany that salad. MOO

 

[Ontario Mom]

I haven't seen any evidence of extreme emotional disturbance as yet while I have seen a sheriff shoot a seated unarmed man multiple times and turn back to deliver two final shots to assure his kill.

I've heard defense counsel suggest such a disturbance was the case. But I won't believe that until I have seen something which explains what the thing was that created the alleged emotional disturbance. It's really that simple. I tend to be leery of defense attorney statements. I respect they have a vital role to play in our justice system. But I personally mistrust them based on decades of following criminal trials. So I take everything they say as word salad until they serve me up some sort of evidence to accompany that salad. MOO

I usually have my stink eye reserved for defense attorneys as well - for the same reason, so I completely get it.
Sometimes they do surprise me though & what they claimed turns out to be true. We'll have to wait and see if this is more typical defense attorney bluster & baloney, or a legit defense.

 

[Seattle1]

I haven't seen any evidence of extreme emotional disturbance as yet while I have seen a sheriff shoot a seated unarmed man multiple times and turn back to deliver two final shots to assure his kill.

I've heard defense counsel suggest such a disturbance was the case. But I won't believe that until I have seen something which explains what the thing was that created the alleged emotional disturbance. It's really that simple. I tend to be leery of defense attorney statements. I respect they have a vital role to play in our justice system. But I personally mistrust them based on decades of following criminal trials. So I take everything they say as word salad until they serve me up some sort of evidence to accompany that salad. MOO

A defendant acting under "extreme emotional disturbance" (EED) for which there was a reasonable explanation or excuse is the only exception cited in the KY Criminal Statute where a defendant shall not be convicted of murder pursuant to KRS 507.020 Murder.

Right or wrong, in KY, the emotional state of a defendant can be used as a shield -- a defense or mitigation to a crime. It's a fact that Stines' defense has been fighting for a reduced charge of Manslaughter since the preliminary hearing.

Unlike an "Insanity" defense where the defendant must prove they were insane at the time of the alleged crime pursuant to KRS 504.020, seems to me the EED defense is very pro-defense, and where the burden falls on the prosecution to prove the defendant did not act under EED. Please see links below for more details.

For a Murder charge, the prosecution needs to prove the LACK of extreme emotional disturbance..... If the prosecution cannot prove that someone intentionally committed Murder WITHOUT the presence of EED, the defendant's charge may be reduced to Manslaughter in the First Degree.

Murder, Homicide, Assault, and Mental State - Louisville Kentucky Law Firm

Law Blog - The mental state of a criminal defendant can seriously affect the outcome of a criminal case. In fact, it can be determinative. Mental state is so

louisvillefirm.com

https://apps.legislature.ky.gov/law/statutes/statute.aspx?id=19717

 

[OldAce]

I am still waiting for confirmation that conversations happened. The officer that testified at the initial hearing to determine if this was sent to GJ was less than forthcoming and his testimony was confusing. So much so that the KSP had to come out and issue a clarification about the phone call. So until something aside from that officer's statement about conversations tells me conversations happened between judge and the minor Stines, I don't know that. JMO

I do agree with you that there is a very strong "move it along here" vibe with this case but IME small southern towns keep to themselves and are not fans of national attention. When tragedy happens they close ranks and look after their own. It is simply how things often work in small town rural America (again JMO).

Without knowing what the perceived threat was, if it was based in reality, and who the other possible perpetrators of said threat are, Mickey should not be released. MOO the risk is too high for further bloodshed.

I agree that Mickey is best off to sit tight and plead his case without rejoining the community.

MIckey's attorney wants to say that this crime was committed due to extreme emotional disturbance. Okay, maybe it was. I don't believe that but let's say it was. Now he gets bail and returns to town to wait for his trial date.

What if someone in the Mullins family bumps into Stines on the street and has their own "extreme emotional disturbance" reaction to seeing him and shoots him down in broad daylight?

I think Mickey's attorney is throwing his line out as far and wide as he can to mask/contain the real reasons. As a good defense atty should do. I think he has/thinks they can, announce some bombshell in open court where it is too late to "get a fix in" or to react physically against Mickey.

If there is a really serious situation behind and caused all this, there are people who will go to an extreme length to contain. That is why I stated, bond not desirable. There is a chance something will happen to Mickey before trial.

Regardless of the various changes in him he still was a very well respected LE. There had to be a compelling reason for him to do this. I think the occurrences cited as mental lapses were simply the burden of what was/had /he had learned of involving /a "situation" that he saw only one way to correct. He may have settled on "the best way to stop a snake is to cut off the head."

Extreme emotional disturbance can range from seeing your neighbors wife in a bar while he is out of town on business to seeing a reputed drug dealer drive up to your neighbors house and take a package in and come out counting money to pocket. Both would be tough knowledge. You can't go talk to some one about it without revealing too much maybe unproven to soon. Granted, you would not kill either (maybe the dealer) but you think of the concern.
Mickeys concern was major. So major, I personally do not expect it to be displayed. He unable to testify, a fix to add to the back story of mental, or whatever can be concocted in this interim.

Another point. There are 2 views in the town. A few utterances at first taking sides, then quiet. There are people there who know exactly what is going on, but are afraid to speak out. The quietness regarding this is deafening. The paper is still running 3 day old repeat commentary. A small town paper editor quiet? I hope I am wrong in all this.

 

[Deleted member 296739]

A defendant acting under "extreme emotional disturbance" (EED) for which there was a reasonable explanation or excuse is the only exception cited in the KY Criminal Statute where a defendant shall not be convicted of murder pursuant to KRS 507.020 Murder.

Right or wrong, in KY, the emotional state of a defendant can be used as a shield -- a defense or mitigation to a crime. It's a fact that Stines' defense has been fighting for a reduced charge of Manslaughter since the preliminary hearing.

Unlike an "Insanity" defense where the defendant must prove they were insane at the time of the alleged crime pursuant to KRS 504.020, seems to me the EED defense is very pro-defense, and where the burden falls on the prosecution to prove the defendant did not act under EED. Please see links below for more details.

For a Murder charge, the prosecution needs to prove the LACK of extreme emotional disturbance..... If the prosecution cannot prove that someone intentionally committed Murder WITHOUT the presence of EED, the defendant's charge may be reduced to Manslaughter in the First Degree.

Murder, Homicide, Assault, and Mental State - Louisville Kentucky Law Firm

Law Blog - The mental state of a criminal defendant can seriously affect the outcome of a criminal case. In fact, it can be determinative. Mental state is so

louisvillefirm.com

https://apps.legislature.ky.gov/law/statutes/statute.aspx?id=19717

Since the charge was for murder and not manslaughter, if the jury does find EED, then he is acquitted? Since the lesser charge wasnt made?

OR at trial can the jury say not guilty if Murder but guilty of manslaughter?

 

[Deleted member 296739]

I think Mickey's attorney is throwing his line out as far and wide as he can to mask/contain the real reasons. As a good defense atty should do. I think he has/thinks they can, announce some bombshell in open court where it is too late to "get a fix in" or to react physically against Mickey.

If there is a really serious situation behind and caused all this, there are people who will go to an extreme length to contain. That is why I stated, bond not desirable. There is a chance something will happen to Mickey before trial.

Regardless of the various changes in him he still was a very well respected LE. There had to be a compelling reason for him to do this. I think the occurrences cited as mental lapses were simply the burden of what was/had /he had learned of involving /a "situation" that he saw only one way to correct. He may have settled on "the best way to stop a snake is to cut off the head."

Extreme emotional disturbance can range from seeing your neighbors wife in a bar while he is out of town on business to seeing a reputed drug dealer drive up to your neighbors house and take a package in and come out counting money to pocket. Both would be tough knowledge. You can't go talk to some one about it without revealing too much maybe unproven to soon. Granted, you would not kill either (maybe the dealer) but you think of the concern.
Mickeys concern was major. So major, I personally do not expect it to be displayed. He unable to testify, a fix to add to the back story of mental, or whatever can be concocted in this interim.

Another point. There are 2 views in the town. A few utterances at first taking sides, then quiet. There are people there who know exactly what is going on, but are afraid to speak out. The quietness regarding this is deafening. The paper is still running 3 day old repeat commentary. A small town paper editor quiet? I hope I am wrong in all this.

The silence is deafening… and the sheriff’s safety would be a factor I would think .., but just because he’s offered bond, doesn’t mean he has to post it…

Wonder if he will go for speedy trial