KY - Judge killed, sheriff arrested in Letcher County courthouse shooting - 19 Seprember 2024 # 4

[Seattle1]

Ex-sheriff Shawn 'Mickey' Stines tries again to remove judge from case

Judge Christopher Cohron previously denied a request from Shawn 'Mickey' Stines that he recuse himself from the murder trial.

www.courttv.com

4/1/26

WHITESBURG, Ky. (Court TV) — Less than a month after his original request was denied, former Letcher County Sheriff Shawn “Mickey” Stines is fighting to have the judge removed from his case.

[..]

Now, Stines has filed an affidavit with the court, saying, in part, “It is my belief that I will not be afforded a fair and impartial trial or pretrial proceedings by Judge Cohron and seek the designation of a special judge pursuant to KRS 26A.020.”

The Kentucky law referenced in the affidavit allows for either party in a case to file an affidavit seeking a new judge if they feel they cannot get a fair trial.

 

[Prancy]

Watching Defense attorney Jeremy Bartley on VPI right now….omg, he looks exactly like the defendant! Even facial hair is the same! Bizarre! Like twins.

 

[Prancy]

I’m wondering why this case doesn’t have more input here. I find it such a mystery. The most reason report of what the sheriff did between lunch af going into judge’s chambers is really bizarre. I have to find a link for it before I can post it here. It was reported on Vinnie Pollaton last week. I think she is a local lawyer who has a tv show.

 

[Luna20]

I’m wondering why this case doesn’t have more input here. I find it such a mystery. The most reason report of what the sheriff did between lunch af going into judge’s chambers is really bizarre. I have to find a link for it before I can post it here. It was reported on Vinnie Pollaton last week. I think she is a local lawyer who has a tv show.

Vinnie Politan is with Court Tv

Vinnie Politan - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[Prancy]

Right. He was hosting a show on court tv featuring this case and a female guest gave information about something the sheriff did between the lunch and shooting. I’m trying to find the link so I can post what she said. It’s my understanding of the rules that I need a link for it,

 

[Missourian]

Right. He was hosting a show on court tv featuring this case and a female guest gave information about something the sheriff did between the lunch and shooting. I’m trying to find the link so I can post what she said. It’s my understanding of the rules that I need a link for it,

There was some talk of the sheriff and the judge swapping guns during lunch. I don’t think that was verified, however.

 

[Prancy]

What was reported on that show is that the sheriff took boxed lunches to the needy. They apparently delivered lunch to seniors, disabled, etc. Later his vehicle is caught on video driving back to the courthouse.

 

[arielilane]

New footage reveals what happened before a sheriff shot a judge inside a courthouse - Survival World

Image Credit: Nate The Lawyer

www.survivalworld.com

Newly released video is giving the public a much closer look at the moments before a Kentucky sheriff shot and killed a judge inside the judge’s chambers, and attorney Nathaniel “Nate” Broughty says the footage fills in a part of the story that had been missing from the start.

In his latest video, Nate the Lawyer walks through what he says is the most important development so far: the newly released camera footage appears to show former Letcher County Sheriff Shawn “Mickey” Stines using Judge Kevin Mullins’ phone, entering the passcode, checking for a number, and then reacting in a way that quickly turned deadly.

That sequence matters because, for months, the biggest question in the case has been the simplest one. Why would a sheriff shoot a judge he reportedly knew well, worked with for years, and had just shared lunch with earlier that same day?

 

[tlcya]

Nate the Lawyer spends most of his attention on the moment that followed, and it is easy to see why.

He says the footage shows Stines on his own phone first, then leaning forward and asking Mullins if he can see the judge’s phone. Mullins hands it over. Then, according to Broughty, Stines asks for the passcode and enters it himself.

From there, Broughty says it appears the sheriff was checking whether a particular number was saved in the judge’s phone.

He also refers to testimony that Stines tried to call his daughter and then tried to call her from Mullins’ phone as well. In the clip he reviews, someone confirms that officers had established that Stines’ daughter’s number was on the judge’s phone.

Then, according to Broughty, everything changed.

He says Stines saw “whatever he sees,” became animated, stood up, pulled his gun, and started shooting the judge.

That is the hinge point in the whole case.
New footage reveals what happened before a sheriff shot a judge inside a courthouse - Survival World

meh, I will give it a listen but the article sounds as if Nate is still pushing the daughter's phone number was stored in judge's phone nonsense and that is simply not true, no matter how much better a story it might make this case for the youtube crowd.

It simply did not happen that way and that has been corrected by LE almost immediately after the on LEO testifying misspoke creating a wrong impression.

 

[Cryptic]

meh, I will give it a listen but the article sounds as if Nate is still pushing the daughter's phone number was stored in judge's phone nonsense and that is simply not true

I suspect that there was a "forbidden number" on the phone.

If so, that forbidden number may belong to a Ms. O' Jayled that Stines had called "dibs" on earlier. In the end, I think both men were arranging uhhmmm..... " special services" for favors at the county jail.

The judge then takes more than his fair share? Or, directs his interests towards a special somebody that Stines had more than just a previous and impersonal "service" connection with?

Some people cycle through a county jail quite often. So, there could be time for a "service" connection to mature into a friendship and a promise or expectation that the proverbial- but in this case, literal "other guy" wont approach her.

 

[tlcya]

I suspect that there was a "forbidden number" on the phone.

If so, that forbidden number may belong to a Ms. O' Jayled that Stines had called "dibs" on earlier. In the end, I think both men were arranging uhhmmm..... " special services" for favors at the county jail.

The judge then takes more than his fair share? Or, directs his interests towards a special somebody that Stines had more than just a previous and impersonal "service" connection with?

Some people cycle through a county jail quite often. So, there could be time for a "service" connection to mature into a friendship and a promise or expectation that the proverbial- but in this case, literal "other guy" wont approach her.

maybe but the continued suggestion as was made in the clip I posted from the article discussing Nate's video on the topic clearly suggested it was confirmed that the sheriff's daughter's phone number was "on the phone" as in that information is what led to the shooting and that has been debunked long ago. The only reason the only reason that number was on the phone was because the sheriff had himself just dialed it using Mullins phone. So logic dictates it would be the last call on his phone.

your theory could be correct, but how does that tie in with his alleged extreme emotional disturbance and his reported concerns about his family's safety?

 

[Cryptic]

your theory could be correct, but how does that tie in with his alleged extreme emotional disturbance and his reported concerns about his family's safety?

Color me cynical cinnamon, but my guess is that citing safety fears for ones own family makes a more attractive defense concept than:

- "Small town favors with various jailed ladies got crazy for reasons "A", "B" or "C". I then had an honor rage moment "

As for extreme emotional disturbances, the thought of real or de facto LWOP would be extremely disturbing to me as well.

 

[tlcya]

Color me cynical cinnamon, but my guess is that citing safety fears for ones own family makes a more attractive defense concept than:

- "Small town favors with various jailed ladies got crazy for reasons "A", "B" or "C" "

As for extreme emotional disturbances, the thought of real or de facto LWOP would be extremely disturbing to me as well.

ah, I am picking up what you are laying down. This case is so bizarre I wouldn't be surprised if you are correct.

 

[Cryptic]

ah, I am picking up what you are laying down. This case is so bizarre I wouldn't be surprised if you are correct.

In the end, I think there are two elements that could have combined and led to the murder:

Start with a dispute. Maybe

- We are both into the game. But who gets to approach what specific "Ms Jayled" for what?
- I did you a favor by fixing case "X", now you refuse to do me a favor by fixing case "Z"?
- Ok, I can tolerate Jail house extracurricular activities. But don't approach "K"- I know her family, etc

Blend in the areas residual honor culture. Getting cheated regarding anything- monetary, favor opportunities can be a severe personal insult. Or, causing somebody to violate his word causes severe insult:
:
- I Promised Ms. P that her wayward daughter would just be given community service. Remember when I released your HS football buddy for lack of evidence? Yeah, also no "special services" with this one- she is a good girl at heart.

Victim still requests special services. Stines is now dishonored and enraged. That fact that he might of been looking for special gratitude" from Ms. P himself might not count.

 

[twall]

Judge to remain in place despite former sheriff Shawn Stines' requests

Shawn Stines had asked for Judge Christopher Cohron to be removed after a video showed Cohron with the victim at a conference.

www.courttv.com

 

[tlcya]

“It stretches the imagination to believe that mere joint attendance at a professional conference and the apparently random decision of Judge Cohron to sit next to the victim would be cause to question whether Judge Cohron could be unbiased,” Deputy Chief Justice Robert Conley wrote in his opinion. “Judges frequently attend professional conferences in the same space as other judges and lawyers with whom they regularly practice. Finding this routine practice to create a disqualifying conflict amongst those in attendance would destroy the very purpose of these conferences: to promote joint and mutual learning of the law and the sharing of varied professional opinions in the greater interest of justice.”
Judge to remain in place despite former sheriff Shawn Stines' requests

he went on to say that Stines had presented zero evidence to support that the two judges had any relationship besides being acquainted and having attended that same conference saying “The facts as alleged simply do not support a conclusion that a reasonable person would question Judge Cohron’s impartiality.”

 

[Seattle1]

I dunno-- seems to me that Deputy Chief Justice Robert Conley missed the point that many of us previously made, where the discomfort here does not stem from the conference itself, but the seemingly blatant non-disclosure by Judge Cohron of this 'benign coincidence' -- days before Mullins was shot dead! Perhaps the wording of the Motion by Stines' defense lost focus here re. battle vs war. JMO

 

[tlcya]

I dunno-- seems to me that Deputy Chief Justice Robert Conley missed the point that many of us previously made, where the discomfort here does not stem from the conference itself, but the seemingly blatant non-disclosure by Judge Cohron of this 'benign coincidence' -- days before Mullins was shot dead! Perhaps the wording of the Motion by Stines' defense lost focus here re. battle vs war. JMO

I just worry that this could end up being an appealable issue down the road and it could easily be cured by simply exercising a modicum of caution now by replacing Cohron.

 

[Seattle1]

IMO, the key words here being: The goal of these recusal provisions is to “avoid even the appearance of partiality so as to promote public confidence in the integrity of the judicial process.”


From the 4/20/26 Supreme Court Ruling (pages 1-8):

Relevant portions of affidavit:

8. In the video, Mullins is shown reporting on his involvement with
legislative efforts as well as the "Womens[sic] with Dignity" bill.
Mullins also highlights his recent recovery events and
expungement efforts in Letcher County. Mullins then discusses his
professional plans for the following week at the District Judge's
College. When Mullins discusses the upcoming events, Judge
Cohron appears to nod in approval.

9. Judge Cohron did not disclose this fact to the parties, despite
the close connection in time to the events at issue, leading to an
appearance of impropriety.

10. It is my belief that the trial of this matter will necessarily
include evidence regarding the week's events Mullins discussed in
the video. As such, it is difficult to believe that Judge Cohron's
proximity with Mullins such a short time before the events at issue
will not affect his judgment in my case. ...
_____________________
Legal citations:

... Similarly, Rule 2.11 of the Kentucky Code of Judicial Conduct provides that “a judge shall disqualify
himself or herself in any proceeding in which the judge’s impartiality might reasonably be questioned.”...

The goal of these recusal provisions is to “avoid even the appearance of partiality so as to promote public confidence in the integrity of the judicial process.”6 While the Chief Justice’s determination under KRS 26A.020 is not a review of a trial court’s decision, applying the objective standard to determine whether a judge’s impartiality might reasonably be questioned is similarly appropriate. ...

Having established the standard for disqualification, the question turns to whether the Plaintiff has established facts to warrant the appointment of a special judge. It stretches the imagination to believe that mere joint attendance at a professional conference and the apparently random decision of Judge Cohron to sit next to the victim would be cause to question whether Judge Cohron could be unbiased. Judges frequently attend professional conferences in the same space as other judges and lawyers with whom they regularly practice. ...

Mr. Stines’ belief “that the trial of this matter will necessarily include evidence regarding the week's events Mullins discussed in the video” does not raise reasonable concern for Judge Cohron’s impartiality, especially since there is no suggestion Circuit Judge Cohron attended the District Judge’s College event. ...

The facts as alleged simply do not support a conclusion that a reasonable person would question Judge Cohron’s impartiality. For this same reason, it was not necessary for Judge Cohron to have disclosed this matter to the parties. Accordingly, the Deputy Chief Justice orders that this matter is
DENIED without prejudice of any party to seek appellate review after entry of a final judgment. ...

Copy of ruling at link below:

Supreme Court allows Stines judge to remain on case - Mountain Top Media

FRANKFORT, Ky. — The Kentucky Supreme Court has denied a request to remove the judge presiding over the Shawn Stines murder case. Stines is charged in the Sept. 19, 2024, shooting death of Letcher County District Judge Kevin Mullins. In its ruling, the court found no evidence that Special Judge...

mountain-topmedia.com

 

[Muddy K]

I’m wondering why this case doesn’t have more input here. I find it such a mystery.

Snipped for focus by me.

This astonishing case, filled with prevarication, paranoia and all manner of small-town goings on, stays on my mind every day. IMO, it's the grinding slowness with which it is moving that reduces the discussion to little more than a trickle at times. I think the thread will blow up when Stines finally goes to trial.

I agree with you @Prancy - it is such a mystery.