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

[Lorenathered]

IMO those are some assumptions. We don't know that any of the people in the video are being forced to endure his smoking. They may not mind or care, are used to it, ect....
Anything that comes out of the mouth of a defense attorney I take with a huge shovel of salt, unless there is proof to back it up. It's their job to spin a favorable story. If the defense is insanity, that tells me there is no understandable, credible, justifiable reason for him to do what he did. What else would reaching for insanity plea say to you?

 

[Izzylizzy]

Streamed 1 day ago

 

[PrairieWind]

IMO those are some assumptions. We don't know that any of the people in the video are being forced to endure his smoking. They may not mind or care, are used to it, ect....
Anything that comes out of the mouth of a defense attorney I take with a huge shovel of salt, unless there is proof to back it up. It's their job to spin a favorable story. If the defense is insanity, that tells me there is no understandable, credible, justifiable reason for him to do what he did. What else would reaching for insanity plea say to you?

Please. This is some sort of official meeting in the Judge's chambers. Its mandatory for those attending (or would certainly be considered such for EEOC reasons.) The Judge is well educated in the law, he knows this. This is a power move on his part.

 

[Lorenathered]

Please. This is some sort of official meeting in the Judge's chambers. Its mandatory for those attending (or would certainly be considered such for EEOC reasons.) The Judge is well educated in the law, he knows this. This is a power move on his part.

I'm curious if you have proof of any of that?

 

[al66pine]

The Lawyer You Know Podcast.

Streamed 1 day ago

@Izzylizzy Thx for link to podcast episode "Now We Know Why" which suggests something new came out yesterday.

If so, I'd like to watch but not if it's a 42 min rehash of what we know from reading this thread & links since Sept.

Is there something actually new? If so, a time stamp pls.
Anyone? TiA.

 

[tlcya]

I have no clue if the pre-lunch pow wow was any sort of official meeting. It is too hard to gauge because I've never seen a judge's chambers that more closely resemble a broom closet or storage room rather than an office. IME when at court, whether at a hearing or in chambers, you are dressed appropriately. These individuals appear to be more casually attired than what would be considered professional for court purposes in my neck of the woods. JMO

There is a male at the bottom left of the in chambers screen who is vaping (dark blue or black T-shirt, tan khakis, tennis shoes). at that point in time Judge Mullins is not smoking. The judge then lights his own cigarette. source: 5:00 mark of this Vinnie P video

ETA also notice the guy in the blue and white checked shirt is smoking a cigarette.

 

[tlcya]

at the 3:44 mark of the same video linked above they show what may be a break room I note a large black plastic ashtray in the middle of the table that may have a couple of cigarette butts in it.

This tells me this wasn't a judge forcing his smoking on others. This suggests to me that he was not the only smoker who was regularly indulging their habit within the confines of the government building/courthouse.

 

[Izzylizzy]

The Lawyer You Know Podcast.

@Izzylizzy Thx for link to podcast episode "Now We Know Why" which suggests something new came out yesterday.

If so, I'd like to watch but not if it's a 42 min rehash of what we know from reading this thread & links since Sept.

Is there something actually new? If so, a time stamp pls.
Anyone? TiA.

I can't help because I haven't read the latest on the thread.
Peter is going over the defense using , "mental disease" etc.
So if there's any confusion on the "insanity defense" etc maybe Peter clears it up?

 

[Seattle1]

But, my point was that we are long passed a point where smoking in a public building isn't allowed. But the Judge did it anyway. Why? In the one video he is clearly having a meeting with other officials about something, an official meeting. They have to be there. And yet the judge lights a cigarette. Now, this in and of itself is just a misdemeanor issue, just a fine at best. But it shows an attitude. Not just that "i can smoke in my office if want" but that "I can make all these people be in my office and smoke and they can't do anything about it."

^^rsbm

While true nationally, I'm making the assumption that Mullins long operated on his legal belief that his chambers were "exempt" from the public building smoke ban pursuant to KY local laws, and not simply an "attitude." There's KY Supreme Court history on the smoking issue. And while personnel could probably do something about it and challenge Mullins' interpretation, seems to me they opted not to-- after nearly two decades!

I think we can chalk this up to reasons similar to why locals would continue to support a gun-wielding Sheriff taking down an unarmed Judge. Or how a former deputy could be sentenced to 7+ years incarceration for rape and tampering charges with all but six months probated. In other words, things appear to go down differently in Letcher County, KY. MOO

Please see my earlier posts for links.

 

[tlcya]

I smoked for a bit as well. And the demonization of smokers is something I never understood. Yes, we all know it is very bad for your health. But it doesn't mean smokers are bad people. Although here in Colorado, we see the same groups that moved to ban tobacco smoking now excusing weed smoke. It is strange.
But, my point was that we are long passed a point where smoking in a public building isn't allowed. But the Judge did it anyway. Why? In the one video he is clearly having a meeting with other officials about something, an official meeting. They have to be there. And yet the judge lights a cigarette. Now, this in and of itself is just a misdemeanor issue, just a fine at best. But it shows an attitude. Not just that "i can smoke in my office if want" but that "I can make all these people be in my office and smoke and they can't do anything about it."
The lawyer's comments make it clear this had been brewing over the last couple years and was coming to head with the depo. It involved other people and the Sheriff had been receiving threats about what he might reveal.
I still have a lot of questions here. Some are very concrete questions that I don't understand why we don't have answers to yet. There was something very serious going on here beyond the previous lawsuit and it clearly involved the Judge and threats to the Sheriff.

I agree with many of your points.

Except for: I don't think we can call what was happening in his chambers an "official" meeting that others are "forced" to attend. The judge and at least one of the four attendees were smoking cigarettes, another was vaping. Most are dressed casually, some in T-shirts, several in tennis shoes. I don't think we can say for sure any of the occupants had to be there. and several were themselves smoking during the pow wow.

I particularly agree with your point about not understanding why we haven't gotten at least some of the questions answered by now. I don't understand why Bartley is being so careful not to say outright that his client feared Mullins was a threat to him or his family. If that is his client's stance or belief why not simply say so? the alleged threat is dead.

 

[al66pine]

I can't help because I haven't read the latest on the thread.
Peter is going over the defense using , "mental disease" etc.
So if there's any confusion on the "insanity defense" etc maybe Peter clears it up?

@lizzylizzy
Thx for response.

 

[PrairieWind]

I agree with many of your points.

Except for: I don't think we can call what was happening in his chambers an "official" meeting that others are "forced" to attend. The judge and at least one of the four attendees were smoking cigarettes, another was vaping. Most are dressed casually, some in T-shirts, several in tennis shoes. I don't think we can say for sure any of the occupants had to be there. and several were themselves smoking during the pow wow.

I particularly agree with your point about not understanding why we haven't gotten at least some of the questions answered by now. I don't understand why Bartley is being so careful not to say outright that his client feared Mullins was a threat to him or his family. If that is his client's stance or belief why not simply say so? the alleged threat is dead.

Who are the people in the meeting? What was the purpose? Why do we not know those answers?
Do we know that the judge was the alleged threat? That isn't what the attorney said and I got the impression of something else entirely. I think the defense is wise to keep things quiet right now; it works to their benefit. I think there are cards to be played, but once they are played, they can't be picked back up. So you have to be careful as to when and how to play them.

 

[OldAce]

RSBM
Do we know definitely that LE did not order him to leave his home? Perhaps he had threatened someone, maybe his wife? And she called LE to remove him? He would probably see that as his wife chucking him out of the home. And perhaps Mullins was involved in his removal.

I think the term "kicked out of his house" is very vague and elusive. And probably applied into this discussion as a comment, rather than a somewhat forceful dispatch.
Does anyone know the original application of this phrase in this?

 

[tlcya]

Who are the people in the meeting? What was the purpose? Why do we not know those answers?
Do we know that the judge was the alleged threat? That isn't what the attorney said and I got the impression of something else entirely. I think the defense is wise to keep things quiet right now; it works to their benefit. I think there are cards to be played, but once they are played, they can't be picked back up. So you have to be careful as to when and how to play them.

I follow you about the defense. I just finished following the Delphi trial in which the defense team used a tactic of attempting to try the case in the press rather than the courtroom so it is at least refreshing to see a defense team taking their job seriously and not playing to the public and holding their cards close to the vest. frustrating but refreshing.

I get the impression the defense is insinuating the judge was the threat but won't come out and say so. If they do not believe the judge was the threat I don't understand how even an EED or insane person would think killing him would end or neutralize whatever that threat was.

No clue who the people are in the chambers get together but I see no evidence it was a meeting per se. It could just as easily have been an impromptu coffee klatch while deciding where to go or what to order at the impending lunch. I agree with you that it is odd that we have no idea who they are or why they were there.

 

[tlcya]

I think the term "kicked out of his house" is very vague and elusive. And probably applied into this discussion as a comment, rather than a somewhat forceful dispatch.
Does anyone know the original application of this phrase in this?

I posted the source of the "asked to leave" the family home info earlier today maybe a page or two back. It was from unnamed "sources" so I am not sure how much credence to give it.

 

[Seattle1]

Relative to the insanity defense, beginning at about the 28:20 minute mark of the YT video, Vinnie is joined by Forensic Neuro-Psychologist Dr Judy Ho, and the attorney for the plaintiff in the civil lawsuit Ned P. What follows is some good insight here on Stines actions after his lunch when he returns in his truck to the Courthouse and re-enters the Courthouse, shoots Judge Mullins, and leaves the building for a few minutes before returning inside to surrender (not captured on released video).

Later, we see Stines being directed to the KSP vehicle and hear Stines reach out to other deputies about treating him fair, loosening his restraints and/ or opening the window, etc., sounding like a possible panic attack which again serves to negate his "insanity" defense and where he's most likely reacting to the offense he just committed.

IMO, there's far too much 'normal' behavior by Stines to invoke insanity but more likely his defense trying to justify his state of extreme emotional disturbance (EED) to mitigate his first-degree murder charge.

While I don't think any talking heads agree with Bartley's use of the 'insanity defense,' I think Bartley doesn't think he has anything to lose by proposing this defense. Clearly, anything less than life in prison will be a win for Stines defense team. JMO

 

[Seattle1]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1900305877187317842

 

[PrairieWind]

^^rsbm

While true nationally, I'm making the assumption that Mullins long operated on his legal belief that his chambers were "exempt" from the public building smoke ban pursuant to KY local laws, and not simply an "attitude." There's KY Supreme Court history on the smoking issue. And while personnel could probably do something about it and challenge Mullins' interpretation, seems to me they opted not to-- after nearly two decades!

I think we can chalk this up to reasons similar to why locals would continue to support a gun-wielding Sheriff taking down an unarmed Judge. Or how a former deputy could be sentenced to 7+ years incarceration for rape and tampering charges with all but six months probated. In other words, things appear to go down differently in Letcher County, KY. MOO

Please see my earlier posts for links.

I would say that 7 years on a rape charge is (sadly) well within the norm nationwide.

 

[Auntie Cipation]

I would say that 7 years on a rape charge is (sadly) well within the norm nationwide.

I think the notable part was the "with all but six months probated."

 

[Seattle1]

I would say that 7 years on a rape charge is (sadly) well within the norm nationwide.

Indeed -- this is the range for 3rd degree felony. However, I don't believe the nationwide norm is for 6.5 years of a 7-year sentence to be probated, and where the felon spends only 6 months in the same local jail where he once worked! JMO