The video of the shooting speaks for itself. Unfortunately there is no audio. It is going to be very difficult to defend. I don't know that there is an excuse. But there IS a reason. There is a reason this murder happened in this way, in front of a camera that I think it is safe to say the Sheriff knew was there.
Just a theory: Stines knew the cameras were recording --yes, I believe this is correct !
He of all people would know the layout and the security cameras of that courthouse.
In his own mind-- maybe he thinks that the motive behind Mullins' murder was so extremely damning.... that he felt he might 'walk' or be sentenced to a short term, once he (Stines) reveals his motive ?
As in a situation or past action on the part of Mullins, that would constitute a valid defense for the murder; which I'm not buying as a possible defense.
Nope.
Imo, it's not going to work that way, Stines.
Hmmm...
What do you all think ?
Still believe Stines needs to face the full brunt of the law, regardless of his reasoning.
If a perp is actively breaking and entering or attempting to assault/kidnap your loved one & you give him the business end of your handgun or clobber him with a vase or golf club -- your case may be a reasonable self-defense.
If someone did what you felt was a criminal act and you wait, & don't report it to anyone, and then kill him in the manner Stines did, you might not be so lucky no matter what went before.
Not saying judge Mullins did anything egregious, as we do not know yet.
But Stines did not have the right to be the judge/jury/executioner.
I'm leaning towards Stines 'silencing' Mullins about something Stines
thinks will validate his actions -- that has yet to be revealed.
One can think of various criminal actions or professional disagreements that escalated or something; still, not an excuse.
It's not like Stines didn't know he could go through legal channels over whatever he thinks is a defense.
Omo.