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

[PrairieWind]

Call could have been made by an app like Signal etc and not as contacts on the phone. You can text and make actual voice calls through those apps that would never show on phone records or in contacts.

 

[Ontario Mom]

Yes that follows- was more thinking of the apps and encryption stuff that isn’t as easy to get at- voip calls, messaging apps, etc that don’t always show up and aren’t easily accessible at times- but there would be a lot of data from just one phone-

No indication that that’s what was happening- more shocked at the why wouldn’t you collect the phone?? moo

Yeah, not collecting the daughter's phone is a stumper. I mean, that's evidence collection 101, even if you don't end up needing it for the investigation.

jmo

 

[Deleted member 296739]

Yeah, not collecting the daughter's phone is a stumper. I mean, that's evidence collection 101, even if you don't end up needing it for the investigation.

jmo

That’s my thinking as well- just bizarre-moo

 

[tlcya]

I am curious what legal grounds people think LE would have to seize the phone a minor child's phone who is not suspected of any crime and was not at the crime scene when said crime occurred?

 

[PrairieWind]

Yeah, not collecting the daughter's phone is a stumper. I mean, that's evidence collection 101, even if you don't end up needing it for the investigation.

jmo

I don't know if we have heard, but was she actually IN the county at the time? We have heard they have talked to her, but is that in person or on the phone? I have heard she was in court behind her father, but is that confirmed?

 

[Deleted member 296739]

I am curious what legal grounds people think LE would have to seize the phone a minor child's phone who is not suspected of any crime and was not at the crime scene when said crime occurred?

Not sure if it’s legit legal grounds or not- IANAL and I’m regularly stunned by what is and isn’t legal…

That said - in my mind if a crime was committed and calls to a third phone were made from 2 phones at the scene just prior to the crime, and the owner of the third phone was related to the accused and admitted to contact with the victim - I’d think that getting a warrant for the third phone would be logical- ish-

In my mind it makes sense- might not be remotely feasible due to her being a minor, or some other legal issue- but it just seems that the crime itself and how it played out sort of involved the daughter’s phone -moo IANAL -

 

[Ontario Mom]

I am curious what legal grounds people think LE would have to seize the phone a minor child's phone who is not suspected of any crime and was not at the crime scene when said crime occurred?

Simply evidence in an investigation into the murder of the judge, by her father. If there is evidence of a motive on her phone, it certainly seems prudent her phone would be collected.

 

[Seattle1]

I don't know if we have heard, but was she actually IN the county at the time? We have heard they have talked to her, but is that in person or on the phone? I have heard she was in court behind her father, but is that confirmed?

Nobody asked about her location during the shooting. However, we know from the PC hearing transcript that the minor was interviewed by Lieutenant Randy Combs and Detective Anthony Trotter in the presence of her parent so I presume this was in person. Also, she's clearly visible in the gallery (with Mom & brother) -- seated behind Stines during his Prelim Hearing.

Post in thread 'KY, Judge Kevin Mullins killed, sheriff arrested, Letcher County courthouse shooting - Sep. 19, 2024 MEDIA, MAPS, & TIMELINE**NO DISCUSSION**'

Oct 3, 2024

• Seattle1

• 

 

[PrairieWind]

I am curious what legal grounds people think LE would have to seize the phone a minor child's phone who is not suspected of any crime and was not at the crime scene when said crime occurred?

Search warrant or subpoena.

 

[OldAce]

That’s my thinking as well- just bizarre-moo

And cheerfully (suppose) accepting a phone from a bystander in the crowd who worked in the sheriffs office and had done texts with him during lunch...

 

[Ontario Mom]

I don't know if we have heard, but was she actually IN the county at the time? We have heard they have talked to her, but is that in person or on the phone? I have heard she was in court behind her father, but is that confirmed?

Beginning at 20:40 the defense atty asks the lead det. if he interviewed Stines' daughter. He says he did not, but she has been interviewed. Defense asks who was present for that interview and the det. names Lt. Randy Combs and Det. Anthony Trotter. Defense then asks if she was interviewed with or without a parent and the det. states that yes, her parent was present. The way he describes the interview and who was present, sounds as if it was in person, but he doesn't explicity state that. Also, yes, she's sitting behind Stines to his left. There was a video posted here from some MSM outlet (now deleted) that had her and her dad sitting in the car singing a song together, and that young woman in the video is the same one sitting in court during Stines' prelim hearing.

 

[PrairieWind]

Beginning at 20:40 the defense atty asks the lead det. if he interviewed Stines' daughter. He says he did not, but she has been interviewed. Defense asks who was present for that interview and the det. names Lt. Randy Combs and Det. Anthony Trotter. Defense then asks if she was interviewed with or without a parent and the det. states that yes, her parent was present. The way he describes the interview and who was present, sounds as if it was in person, but he doesn't explicity state that. Also, yes, she's sitting behind Stines to his left. There was a video posted here from some MSM outlet (now deleted) that had her and her dad sitting in the car singing a song together, and that young woman in the video is the same one sitting in court during Stines' prelim hearing.

Thank you. I had seen her but was not certain that was his daughter.

 

[LadyL]

I don't know if we have heard, but was she actually IN the county at the time? We have heard they have talked to her, but is that in person or on the phone? I have heard she was in court behind her father, but is that confirmed?

yes it's on video

 

[TristanP]

Search warrant or subpoena.

Those would be means to obtain the phone, but not legal grounds.

For example, let’s say your dad goes in to an office and shoots John Doe, and just before he does, he calls you. If police showed up at your door and said “Hey, your dad shot John Doe today, and he called you right before it happened, so we’re gonna need you to hand over your phone.”

Would you actually give them your phone? I sure wouldn’t. I’d tell them to come back with a warrant.

They’d have to have justification to get a warrant from a judge.

 

[Ontario Mom]

Those would be means to obtain the phone, but not legal grounds.

For example, let’s say your dad goes in to an office and shoots John Doe, and just before he does, he calls you. If police showed up at your door and said “Hey, your dad shot John Doe today, and he called you right before it happened, so we’re gonna need you to hand over your phone.”

Would you actually give them your phone? I sure wouldn’t. I’d tell them to come back with a warrant.

They’d have to have justification to get a warrant from a judge.

To be more accurate, the dad doesn't just call the daughter from his own phone, he also calls her from John Doe's phone, thereby connecting the daughter and her phone, to what just happened.

Does LE have probable cause to collect & examine her phone? Off the top I'd say yes, simply because we know her dad called her from the judge's phone. Even more compelling is the fact she was interviewed and told LE about her phone conversations with the judge. So clearly there's some kind of evidence on her phone. Why it was not collected is rather unusual to me.

jmo

 

[Wallendo]

The "minor child" is 17 not 6. Her phone is potential evidence in a murder case. Calls to her phone somehow relate to this killing. There should be no issue examining her phone with a valid search warrant.

If this case were in Florida where its aggressive public disclosure laws would invade her privacy, there might be issues. In this case, her phone might not be helpful, but if this case goes to trial, lack of examination could be an issue regarding reasonable doubt.

It may just be a gut feeling, but I suspect LE knows more about the motive in this case than they have publicly disclosed.

 

[OldAce]

The "minor child" is 17 not 6. Her phone is potential evidence in a murder case. Calls to her phone somehow relate to this killing. There should be no issue examining her phone with a valid search warrant.

If this case were in Florida where its aggressive public disclosure laws would invade her privacy, there might be issues. In this case, her phone might not be helpful, but if this case goes to trial, lack of examination could be an issue regarding reasonable doubt.

It may just be a gut feeling, but I suspect LE knows more about the motive in this case than they have publicly disclosed.

Seems obvious to me that LE is "dragging its feet" on serious investigation of this case. Self regulated, or looming wider involvement better not disclosed. Possibly LE has info they do not want to be the ones to disclose. hence trial and then let it be "dug" out. There is something lurking in the overall cause of this.

 

[tlcya]

Not sure if it’s legit legal grounds or not- IANAL and I’m regularly stunned by what is and isn’t legal…

That said - in my mind if a crime was committed and calls to a third phone were made from 2 phones at the scene just prior to the crime, and the owner of the third phone was related to the accused and admitted to contact with the victim - I’d think that getting a warrant for the third phone would be logical- ish-

In my mind it makes sense- might not be remotely feasible due to her being a minor, or some other legal issue- but it just seems that the crime itself and how it played out sort of involved the daughter’s phone -moo IANAL -

Simply evidence in an investigation into the murder of the judge, by her father. If there is evidence of a motive on her phone, it certainly seems prudent her phone would be collected.

seizing her phone may not give them any further evidence. People want her phone seized because the judge could have deleted things from his phone. If there was evidence on hers it too could have been deleted/removed from the phone.

I don't think they had PC to seize her phone based on a phone call being made to her phone which she apparently did not answer.

I think they will get anything they need by subpoenaing the data, call and message history from the providers of the phones. This would reveal not only what was on the phones but also anything that had been deleted from the device. No need to seize the actual phones JMO

 

[ilovewings]

Seems obvious to me that LE is "dragging its feet" on serious investigation of this case. Self regulated, or looming wider involvement better not disclosed. Possibly LE has info they do not want to be the ones to disclose. hence trial and then let it be "dug" out. There is something lurking in the overall cause of this.

I don't think there is any evidence that LE is dragging its feet in investigating this case. This is a very high profile case involving a dead judge, murdered by a sheriff. I would think the police are doing a thorough investigation and keeping their investigation quiet. Of course the public is anxious for information and filling in the blanks with lots of speculation---

 

[Curiousobserver]

The bar for a phone subpoena is very low, if they want her phone they will get it or already have it. You don't always need to "serve" a phone warrant, so she may not even know LE has seen her phone records.

There is very little verified information on the case and it may be the case that what actually occurred is known by LE and that it has nothing to do with the daughter or her phone, or that she has actually allowed them to examine the phone.