Kentucky - Judge killed, sheriff arrested in Letcher County courthouse shooting - Sep. 19, 2024 # 4

[tricia]

Defense wants judge removed

MSN

 

[katydid23]

Is there ANY judge in the area that won't have close connections to the victims? It will be hard to find someone that doesn't for the recusal standards.

Are they going to have to move to another county?

 

[tlcya]

Is there ANY judge in the area that won't have close connections to the victims? It will be hard to find someone that doesn't for the recusal standards.

Are they going to have to move to another county?

1st BBM legitimate concern IMO and why I feel a special judge should be assigned from an area in Kentucky far far from Lechter County to avoid any possible suggestion of bias or conflict.

2nd BBM Judge hasn't ruled yet on the request by prosecution to change venue and I go back on forth on what I think of moving the trial. Both victim and accused are so very well known throughout the county and both held positions of weight within it. MOO it will be difficult if not impossible to seat a jury full of local peers who haven't heard about the case, formed an opinion and who haven't had personal contact and dealings with one or both men. While I am generally not one who thinks a change in venue is necessary, I wonder if ever there was a case to be made for it, if maybe this one isn't it?

 

[girlhasnoname]

1st BBM legitimate concern IMO and why I feel a special judge should be assigned from an area in Kentucky far far from Lechter County to avoid any possible suggestion of bias or conflict.

2nd BBM Judge hasn't ruled yet on the request by prosecution to change venue and I go back on forth on what I think of moving the trial. Both victim and accused are so very well known throughout the county and both held positions of weight within it. MOO it will be difficult if not impossible to seat a jury full of local peers who haven't heard about the case, formed an opinion and who haven't had personal contact and dealings with one or both men. While I am generally not one who thinks a change in venue is necessary, I wonder if ever there was a case to be made for it, if maybe this one isn't it?

Could not agree more @ticya

 

[arielilane]

Hearing reveals key details in civil case against Shawn Stines

The civil lawsuit filed by Kevin Mullins' widow seeks to hold Shawn Stines and his employees liable for allegedly failing to prevent the tragedy despite warning signs.

www.courttv.com

1/7/2026

 

[Seattle1]

Defense wants judge removed

MSN

9 page "Verified Motion to Recuse/Disqualify" filed on 12/30/25 at MSM link below:

Stines' attorneys ask judge to recuse himself from murder trial - Mountain Top Media

WHITESBURG, Ky. — We now have a good idea about what prompted the cancellation of the most recent court hearing in the case against the former Letcher County sheriff accused of murdering a district judge. Former Letcher Sheriff Shawn Mickey Stines is charged with murder for shooting and killing...

mountain-topmedia.com

 

[tlcya]

"no legal basis as support for the refusal to unseal the state's psychiatric report."

What was the legal basis for defense to request the unsealing of a state expert's report is my question? Perhaps the judge didn't find the defense argument for doing so compelling. JMO. While I do believe a judge from far outside the area should probably be assigned, the defense is expressing sour grapes for a ruling that didn't go their way with little proof of demonstrable bias.

 

[Chimera]

Agreed 100 % with a change in venue and an impartial judge.
Since people who are far away from KY have at least heard about this case, and have maybe even formed an opinion; it seems they'd have to change the venue and most likely appoint a new judge ?
The current judge who may oversee this case may have known both Mullins and Steins for years if not decades.
A conflict of interest, and all that.
Jmo.

 

[wtiger]

given that the murder is on camera i cannot see how any jury can really be impartial!...i am thousands of miles away but could comfortably convict Stines

 

[FromGermany1]

IF Stines murdered M because of his concerns, in court M would always be "the innocent", no matter, what damage he possibly had caused in the past, and himself (Stines) and others would be the guilty ones, then this murder wasn't really the solution. Each judge, where ever, will in his own interest be on the victim's/Mullin's side, I think. MOO

 

[dalsglen]

When is this one actually gonna go to trial?

 

[rogue ant]

given that the murder is on camera i cannot see how any jury can really be impartial!...i am thousands of miles away but could comfortably convict Stines

I'm assuming Stines is going to try an insanity defense.

 

[Luna20]

I'm assuming Stines is going to try an insanity defense.

Agree because of the video. It now becomes a point of his sanity to defend.

 

[Kemug]

The whole world (if interested) knows who shot whom. Surely the only thing to be decided at first is if he was crazy or not. A trio/panel/group of psychiatrists (whatever is legally required) can opine on that, also any witnesses to prior weird behaviour. This is an unusual case, it shouldn't be the normal battle between prosecution and defence. Until and unless the mental experts decide that he isn't crazy and never was. Then business as usual.

 

[katydid23]

The whole world (if interested) knows who shot whom. Surely the only thing to be decided at first is if he was crazy or not. A trio/panel/group of psychiatrists (whatever is legally required) can opine on that, also any witnesses to prior weird behaviour. This is an unusual case, it shouldn't be the normal battle between prosecution and defence. Until and unless the mental experts decide that he isn't crazy and never was. Then business as usual.

It's going to be be a weird legal battle, IF the judge allows much of the backstory concerning the previous crimes in the judge's chambers etc. Stine's only hope is that the jury believes he was truly worried and disgusted about possible future bad acts against women, and Stines was irrational but trying to prevent that, etc...

I doubt the judge will allow all of that prior stuff in though/ But who knows?

 

[jepop]

The whole world (if interested) knows who shot whom. Surely the only thing to be decided at first is if he was crazy or not. A trio/panel/group of psychiatrists (whatever is legally required) can opine on that, also any witnesses to prior weird behaviour. This is an unusual case, it shouldn't be the normal battle between prosecution and defence. Until and unless the mental experts decide that he isn't crazy and never was. Then business as usual.

Don't have my head around the precise law and legal process in Kentucky for an insanity defense, but if it's at all on a par with other States, then if the defense does go this route, well won't that actually be the business as usual?

Insanity defense is usually proactive IMO. So jmo the state's burden becomes proving BARD that the perp was not insane during the crime window by countering the defense's experts and other witnesses. At trial, the defense will bring in their experts to try and prove Stines was insane at the time he gunned down Mullins, and the State will counter with witnesses to try and show Stines knew what was what. Moo for ,'insanity defense'.

I believe the above is separate from an assessment of competency to stand trial? That can happen at pretrial stage IMO and court decides whether Stines is competent; if he is found competent then moo it's business as usual ie if the defense says their going with an insanity defence, then the business will revolve around that going forward for both sides. Jmo

 

[Rosydecember]

I still can’t help but wonder if Stines has a brain tumor or something… it’s just… i still have a hard time wrapping my head around this one

 

[katydid23]

I still can’t help but wonder if Stines has a brain tumor or something… it’s just… i still have a hard time wrapping my head around this one

It's kind of hard to think he was in a sound mind---A Sheriff stepping into the judge's chambers in broad daylight, knowing all of the cameras and witnesses are going to see it all, and he just shoots point blank.

It does not seem like he was sane at the time. But he acted like he knew exactly what he was doing, so?

 

[OldAce]

It's kind of hard to think he was in a sound mind---A Sheriff stepping into the judge's chambers in broad daylight, knowing all of the cameras and witnesses are going to see it all, and he just shoots point blank.

It does not seem like he was sane at the time. But he acted like he knew exactly what he was doing, so?

As sane as a judge..... Mullins had crossed a line somehow; at sometime, and it festered so he decided to right it. Linearity of purpose; drives men to commit fearsome deeds, from combat to personal defense/safety.
There was/is an underlining cause here wee may never know.

 

[girlhasnoname]

It's kind of hard to think he was in a sound mind---A Sheriff stepping into the judge's chambers in broad daylight, knowing all of the cameras and witnesses are going to see it all, and he just shoots point blank.

It does not seem like he was sane at the time. But he acted like he knew exactly what he was doing, so?

Right, and they had just gone to lunch together and were perfectly normal according to sources. Crazy.