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

[Chimera]

I wonder what he was thinking as he circled the building before the shooting? The way he just calmly strolls around as the people are running around seems strange too.

Indeed ! ^^^

Cold.
Calculated.
Imo.

 

[tlcya]

'It's extremely complicated': Sheriff Stines' attorney on deadly shooting

per Bartley there are three options (note he doesn't land on one for sure but indicates he has a vision of where things are headed) as to whether the perceived threat to Stines' family was a real one based in reality or not.

1) there was no objective threat and was all a complete fabrication within his own mind
2) there was someone around the corner and he was only perceiving an actual objective threat
3) combination of both. Objective threat to his family but mental health was impaired so that he couldn't realistically gauge if that threat was imminent in nature or accurately gauge the magnitude of said threat.

Three is defense's current theory sounds like. Which leaves me with the impression they will argue while the alleged threat was neither immediate nor as serious as Mickey perceived them, a threat of some sort existed Sounds like we are teasing that defense will be maligning the dead man to try to show the non immediate non serious threat existed just not to the level that would meet an EED murder defense. Therefore they will plead he was insane a the time of the shooting. JMO

 

[Leilei]

'It's extremely complicated': Sheriff Stines' attorney on deadly shooting

per Bartley there are three options (note he doesn't land on one for sure but indicates he has a vision of where things are headed) as to whether the perceived threat to Stines' family was a real one based in reality or not.

1) there was no objective threat and was all a complete fabrication within his own mind
2) there was someone around the corner and he was only perceiving an actual objective threat
3) combination of both. Objective threat to his family but mental health was impaired so that he couldn't realistically gauge if that threat was imminent in nature or accurately gauge the magnitude of said threat.

Three is defense's current theory sounds like. Which leaves me with the impression they will argue while the alleged threat was neither immediate nor as serious as Mickey perceived them, a threat of some sort existed Sounds like we are teasing that defense will be maligning the dead man to try to show the non immediate non serious threat existed just not to the level that would meet an EED murder defense. Therefore they will plead he was insane a the time of the shooting. JMO

Numbers two and three don't fly with me. If the threat was "around the corner", why go all the way into the courthouse, into the judge's office, and kill the judge?
Number one... well, maybe, but if is no documented psychological evidence, I don't see that flying, either.
I really can't wait for this trial, if only to see Stines declared guilty of first degree murder.
IMO.

 

[tlcya]

Numbers two and three don't fly with me. If the threat was "around the corner", why go all the way into the courthouse, into the judge's office, and kill the judge?
Number one... well, maybe, but if is no documented psychological evidence, I don't see that flying, either.
I really can't wait for this trial, if only to see Stines declared guilty of first degree murder.
IMO.

yeah his wording on number 2 kinda lost me. "someone around the corner" ? huh? like literally a person was a threat and right around the corner from him or did he mean to imply someone in the not too distant future was perceived as threat?

Still being careful not to name Mullins as that perceived threat. I wonder why?

 

[Rosiebones]

Has it ever been clarified and reported further as to why his wife kicked him out of the house the evening before?

 

[tlcya]

Has it ever been clarified and reported further as to why his wife kicked him out of the house the evening before?

as far as I know we've never heard another word about that aspect of the case. But his attorney has been pretty quiet overall. IME defense attorneys tend to want to get their client's "side" out in the press to try to sway public opinion. I hate when they do that btw. But this one is so far playing his cards really close to the vest. JMO

 

[tricia]

That’s wild!

I’m curious about Mullins decision to smoke. It’s a weird place to smoke if it’s not allowed, high traffic and high anxiety.

A judge who makes decisions on people who don’t obey laws is a bit of irony. Laws are laws.

tlcya I commented about Mullins smoking on our live stream. it was so strange to see someone smoke inside a government building. That has to be against the law right?
The fact that he lit up in a small crowded room speaks volumes to me.

 

[tricia]

Has it ever been clarified and reported further as to why his wife kicked him out of the house the evening before?

Not that I am aware of Rosiebones. That would be good info to find out. When this case goes to trial (unless they take a plea deal) we should find the answers to all these questions.

 

[tlcya]

tlcya I commented about Mullins smoking on our live stream. it was so strange to see someone smoke inside a government building. That has to be against the law right?
The fact that he lit up in a small crowded room speaks volumes to me.

I didn't find that as shocking as some but yeah, that would never fly in my county. But I do believe things like that probably do happen in smaller counties, no matter the state. I suspect Mullins wasn't the only one who regularly smoked in that government building. Him doing so probably made other smokers who worked in the building feel more comfortable breaking that rule as well. JMO

I am keeping in mind that Lechter County is less than half the size of mine, covering 399 miles with a population of approx 20.5 thousand (mine covers 877 miles population 194.5 thousand as a comparison)

I suspect this is more common in smaller more rural courthouses than in larger cities.

 

[Vaderman]

I didn't find that as shocking as some but yeah, that would never fly in my county. But I do believe things like that probably do happen in smaller counties, no matter the state. I suspect Mullins wasn't the only one who regularly smoked in that government building. Him doing so probably made other smokers who worked in the building feel more comfortable breaking that rule as well. JMO

I am keeping in mind that Lechter County is less than half the size of mine, covering 399 miles with a population of approx 20.5 thousand (mine covers 877 miles population 194.5 thousand as a comparison)

I suspect this is more common in smaller more rural courthouses than in larger cities.

It reminds me of a college professor I had who was the director of his program. He was untouchable. The rules didn't apply to him. And he knew no one would survive in their position if they challenged him on it.

 

[Ontario Mom]

It reminds me of a college professor I had who was the director of his program. He was untouchable. The rules didn't apply to him. And he knew no one would survive in their position if they challenged him on it.

Interesting observation. Hard not to wonder if Mullins didn't have the same reputation.

 

[Luna20]

tlcya I commented about Mullins smoking on our live stream. it was so strange to see someone smoke inside a government building. That has to be against the law right?
The fact that he lit up in a small crowded room speaks volumes to me.

Yes! It’s a law. Considering that it is a threat to some people that makes it a real head scratcher. The only courthouse in that town, where every type of person who has a matter involving the law goes and you choose to break the law to smoke??

That wouldn’t happen in a courthouse in a larger city. As soon as smoke was detected, an alarm would blast throughout the building and the smoker would be exited out by the police who would perform protocols for the law broken.

It’s so brazen, dangerous and backwards. I understand that Mullins was the only judge employed there and Stines was the only head sheriff so maybe things were less official? Maybe Mullins or Stines thought they were the boss of everyone?

This lends itself to precarious things taking place in the judge’s chambers.

 

[iamshadow21]

Regardless of his habit of smoking indoors, the man didn't invite his death for it. Speculating about what else he might have done outside the law or in his chambers because he smoked there is a reach. Lots of people smoke, and lots of people smoke where they shouldn't. It's beside the point, here. He's a victim.

MOO

 

[vls12345]

Regardless of his habit of smoking indoors, the man didn't invite his death for it. Speculating about what else he might have done outside the law or in his chambers because he smoked there is a reach. Lots of people smoke, and lots of people smoke where they shouldn't. It's beside the point, here. He's a victim.

MOO

This. Thank you.

(Fwiw, I am not a smoker. I can't stand the smell of smoke.)

Eta: Also, tobacco was once a major crop in KY. So even though smoking in general has declined in the past couple of decades throughout the US, I think states where tobacco is or was a major crop tend to have more lenient social attitudes toward smoking in general. Imo. (Saying this as a native tarheel.) Most US tobacco is grown in NC, second-most in KY.

Tobacco Production by State 2025

Discover population, economy, health, and more with the most comprehensive global statistics at your fingertips.

worldpopulationreview.com

 

[OldAce]

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.

There was a reason.
Facts revealed in the recent deposition he was in gave him insight to some "situation."
The phone call he received during/at the lunch corroborated/offered addition facts ref that "situation".
With this "evidence/proof substantiated, he went down to the courthouse and settled matters.

Just my summation of his thoughts, reasons, plan, and subsequent action. I will venture that if when

I didn't find that as shocking as some but yeah, that would never fly in my county. But I do believe things like that probably do happen in smaller counties, no matter the state. I suspect Mullins wasn't the only one who regularly smoked in that government building. Him doing so probably made other smokers who worked in the building feel more comfortable breaking that rule as well. JMO

I am keeping in mind that Lechter County is less than half the size of mine, covering 399 miles with a population of approx 20.5 thousand (mine covers 877 miles population 194.5 thousand as a comparison)

I suspect this is more common in smaller more rural courthouses than in larger cities.

You must be in TX or one of the western states. I have trucked across some of them in years past. Vast is the word...

 

[Seattle1]

Oooops I meant Bartley. I watched it and have some questions. How quickly will the link be available to post?

Link to the 43 min interview between Vinnie Politan and Jeremy Bartley:

Stines' Attorney Plans Insanity Defense | Vinnie Politan Investigates

Vinnie Politan Investigates Episodes | Court TV

In this weekday series, Vinnie Politan looks at every angle of cases making headlines.

www.courttv.com

 

[Leilei]

Regardless of his habit of smoking indoors, the man didn't invite his death for it. Speculating about what else he might have done outside the law or in his chambers because he smoked there is a reach. Lots of people smoke, and lots of people smoke where they shouldn't. It's beside the point, here. He's a victim.

MOO

Exactly.
I doubt that Stines murdered him due to him smoking in his chambers.
IMO.

 

[Ssschu]

It reminds me of a college professor I had who was the director of his program. He was untouchable. The rules didn't apply to him. And he knew no one would survive in their position if they challenged him on it.

Could explain why he felt the need to take the law into his own hands to protect his family if he knew the judge was untouchable.

 

[Chimera]

I can imagine some possibilities that would drive Stines to murder, despite knowing full well of the consequences ... however am going to wait for some updates or clarification as to what's already known.
Still nothing I can imagine is going to let him 'walk' !
Omo.

 

[Seattle1]

Relative to cigarette smoking in the Letcher County 47th Judicial District Courthouse Chambers of the late Judge Kevin Mullins (as seen on video by Kevin Mullins and Mike Watts, Circuit Court Clerk), I think it's fair to say that Letcher County is most likely relying on case law where local authorities having legal authority to regulate smoking in KY was ruled unconstitutional. In this case, the private quarters of the District Court Judge's Chambers were probably declared exempt, and nobody in the County (in their right mind) would ever challenge this! This ^^ is right up there with nobody in the County dared to cite a bad word about Mickey Stines! In other words, some local rules only need be implied. MOO

Legal Authority to Regulate Smoking in Kentucky | BREATHE

breathe.uky.edu

9 While the court in the Lexington case ultimately struck one small clause in the law,10 other courts that have acknowledged vagueness arguments ultimately ruled on other grounds.11

Cities and counties can better avoid constitutional challenges based on vagueness arguments by ensuring that smoke-free laws provide clear guidelines to the public.

Smoke-free laws should be comprehensive and treat similar businesses similarly.​

Nationally, many challenges to smoke-free laws are brought by businesses arguing that exemptions to smoke-free laws are unfair because they allow smoking in certain places (e.g., casinos), while prohibiting smoking in other venues (e.g., bars). These businesses often argue that such exemptions violate the Equal Protection Clause of the U.S. and/or state Constitution.

While the Kentucky Supreme Court has never directly ruled on the constitutionality of exemptions to smoke-free laws, challenges to smoke-free laws in other jurisdictions on this basis are rarely successful. Because there are still expenses associated with successfully defending a law, a city or county can better avoid litigation – and better protect public health –if it enacts a smoke-free law that applies to all enclosed public places and workplaces, without exceptions.