Letcher Co shooting

[august-west]

The Courier Journal story had a photo of unnamed "supporters" of the sheriff in the gallery yesterday that I would believe likely to be the sheriff's wife and daughter.

Anyone know if that is true?

I don’t know who the dark haired girl behind Stines was but she was very attractive. Sometimes genetics are a funny thing.

 

[C.W.1]

I didn't watch but are you sure the question wasnt about "whatsapp"? Thats an app owned by Facebook thats commonly used as a clandestine way to text someone

He asked if Judge Mullins' phone had "apps" on it. I never heard him ask about about "whatsapp". He at one point asked him if it had apps on it such as Facebook, that could contain information outside of the phone.

 

[Caveman Catfan]

From my listening, the KSP detective talks about what the sheriff said after being taken into custody. It is clear the detective is reporting hearsay and did not hear what was said directly. Here is how I heard the quote: "When he was taken into custody, I was told by one of the other officers who was there that he made the comment 'They are trying to kidnap my wife and kid.'"

Detective says no LEO tried to interview the sheriff after arrest. Interesting. Unclear if they just assumed he would lawyer up, were worried about doing something to screw up the eventual conviction (and likely death penalty attempt), or there is some other reason.

Quote about the "kidnapping" starts around the 26 minute mark. WARNING: THE VIDEO OF THE SHOOTING IS IN THE FIRST PART OF THE LINK.

View embedded media

At the preliminary hearing or probable cause hearing, the officer who testifies can just be someone brought up to speed on the evidence, because hearsay is permitted. The prosecution can use an officer who has simply read the file, if they want.

 

[8titles]

After watching that video, there’s no justification. That was an execution. He shot that man at least six to seven times with pauses in between. That was cold blooded murder. After the first shot, you can see the judge try to get up. And the sheriff just shoots him damn near point blank in the head once or twice. He then goes back around the desk moves the chair and shots him two more times after he’s clearly down. It’s the pauses that get me. Like had he just emptied his clip into him in one rage action i might see it. The pauses between shots are just soulless.

Of course there isn't justification, but that wasn't my point.

 

[august-west]

At the preliminary hearing or probable cause hearing, the officer who testifies can just be someone brought up to speed on the evidence, because hearsay is permitted. The prosecution can use an officer who has simply read the file, if they want.

But they didn’t in this case. This guy is the lead detective. I guess one of my questions would be why has he not been the one interviewing all of the witnesses?

 

[Caveman Catfan]

But they didn’t in this case. This guy is the lead detective. I guess one of my questions would be why has he not been the one interviewing all of the witnesses?

Has the shooter been interviewed or was his statement simply offered during the apprehension? The lead detective would not be on the scene for the immediate aftermath of the shooting. I am not following this off this thread. I know Ragland has been cited here. Because I have seen firsthand how he (his “team”) has wrongly reported a federal trial I was involved with, I don’t know that I put too much stock in his assessments. Now, simply rebroadcasting the courtroom video is another thing.

 

[C.W.1]

Has the shooter been interviewed or was his statement simply offered during the apprehension? The lead detective would not be on the scene for the immediate aftermath of the shooting. I am not following this off this thread. I know Ragland has been cited here. Because I have seen firsthand how he (his “team”) has wrongly reported a federal trial I was involved with, I don’t know that I put too much stock in his assessments. Now, simply rebroadcasting the courtroom video is another thing.

From watching the PH, there was no mention that Stines had been interviewed. The KSP detective said he told officers at the scene, "they're trying to kidnap my family." The only thing the detective said Stines said to the detective himself was be "fair" to me. After watching the horrific video of what this sheriff had done to his long-time friend and unarmed judge, it struck me as beyond ironic that he was asking someone else to be "fair" to him. He, in a deliberate and stalking manner, shot his long-time friend and unarmed judge with 6-8 shots and then opened the door like it was just a typical day.

The detective looked pretty frustrated at one point with what the defense attorney was asking. I'm sure that's pretty typical but the way the detective volunteered that the daughter has made statements about what had occurred and the way the attorney quickly pivoted away from that to the apps on Judge Mullins' phone, it made me think the statements she has made do not support the salacious rumors but are, instead, more likely to be along the lines of what august-west posted he had heard about family problems.

 

[bbncal02]

From watching the PH, there was no mention that Stines had been interviewed. The KSP detective said he told officers at the scene, "they're trying to kidnap my family." The only thing the detective said Stines said to the detective himself was be "fair" to me. After watching the horrific video of what this sheriff had done to his long-time friend and unarmed judge, it struck me as beyond ironic that he was asking someone else to be "fair" to him. He, in a deliberate and stalking manner, shot his long-time friend and unarmed judge with 6-8 shots and then opened the door like it was just a typical day.

The detective looked pretty frustrated at one point with what the defense attorney was asking. I'm sure that's pretty typical but the way the detective volunteered that the daughter has made statements about what had occurred and the way the attorney quickly pivoted away from that to the apps on Judge Mullins' phone, it made me think the statements she has made do not support the salacious rumors but are, instead, more likely to be along the lines of what august-west posted he had heard about family problems.

Yeah, if those rumors had any weight. I'd be telling my attorney to be saying it constantly. Trial would still commence of course, but the sympathy would swing towards him.

He's getting NO sympathy right now. No one believes a sitting judge would be trying to openly kidnap a coworker's family. That plot wouldn't even fly in Hollywood.

 

[Hank Camacho]

I've never wanted to sit on a grand jury before but this one would be fascinating.

(Most people actually really enjoy grand jury duty.)

Interview with attorneys. I'm not sure if they've even taken a narrative from him yet.

 

[UKBrassowTipIN]

Watched the video of the preliminary hearing on Kentucky.com. When they play the shooting video on there of the courtroom, you can see Stines and the people behind him and not the video of the shooting. The people in the first row behind the defense table appear to probably be his daughter, his wife and another man. The daughter, turns away and doesn't watch when the prosecution plays the video of Stines shooting Judge Mullins. The woman who is likely Stines's wife appears to be looking down but starts to cry and the man next to her tries to comfort her. It's unclear if she sees the shooting or if she hears Judge Mullins' family crying. Stines, himself, looks down and appears to not want to watch it.

When the defense attorney asks the KSP detective about Stines calling his daughter from his own phone and Judge Mullins's phone there is little to know reaction from the daughter. The mother does put her arm around the daughter. Stines is still looking down much of the time.

One thing I caught when I watched it again is the KSP detective volunteers that the daughter has made statements about what had occurred, apparently with these phone calls. It's almost as if the witness wants to go there. While the defense attorney asks the detective for hearsay statements throughout, at one point even noted to the detective that he's allowed to testify regarding hearsay in a preliminary hearing, the defense attorney steers away from asking any questions about the daughter's statements. He, instead, pivots to whether Judge Mullins had apps on his phone. Who doesn't have apps on his or her

Messaging apps like WhatsApp, kik, Facebook messenger....those are relevant

 

[Caveman Catfan]

From watching the PH, there was no mention that Stines had been interviewed. The KSP detective said he told officers at the scene, "they're trying to kidnap my family." The only thing the detective said Stines said to the detective himself was be "fair" to me. After watching the horrific video of what this sheriff had done to his long-time friend and unarmed judge, it struck me as beyond ironic that he was asking someone else to be "fair" to him. He, in a deliberate and stalking manner, shot his long-time friend and unarmed judge with 6-8 shots and then opened the door like it was just a typical day.

The detective looked pretty frustrated at one point with what the defense attorney was asking. I'm sure that's pretty typical but the way the detective volunteered that the daughter has made statements about what had occurred and the way the attorney quickly pivoted away from that to the apps on Judge Mullins' phone, it made me think the statements she has made do not support the salacious rumors but are, instead, more likely to be along the lines of what august-west posted he had heard about family problems.

The pastor friend to both men suggested this was a case of actual mental illness. Time will tell.

 

[Caveman Catfan]

Yeah, if those rumors had any weight. I'd be telling my attorney to be saying it constantly. Trial would still commence of course, but the sympathy would swing towards him.

He's getting NO sympathy right now. No one believes a sitting judge would be trying to openly kidnap a coworker's family. That plot wouldn't even fly in Hollywood.

If those rumors had validity, the case would be charged as manslaughter.

 

[mrschwump]

The pastor friend to both men suggested this was a case of actual mental illness. Time will tell.

If that's the case, and I wouldn't be surprised, could there have been an intervention?

 

[bbncal02]

If those rumors had validity, the case would be charged as manslaughter.

I concur. Still, if they had any validity if I'm his attorney, I'm saying it.

The fact it hasn't come up has shown once again the internet to be wrong. And sadly, the "FB says its true" crowd is still trumpeting it.

 

[bigblueinsanity]

I concur. Still, if they had any validity if I'm his attorney, I'm saying it.

The fact it hasn't come up has shown once again the internet to be wrong. And sadly, the "FB says its true" crowd is still trumpeting it.

His attorney will say it, this is just not the hearing for laying a defense.

Plus for the defense theyll make, it really doesn't matter if its true or not. It just matters if he reasonably believed it to be true at the time.

 

[WildcatofNati2]

Several attorneys on this thread have called this a death penalty case. How is this possibly a death penalty case as opposed to vanilla murder? I have no idea why this sheriff did this, and am not inclined to sympathy for him.

Still, how is this a death case? If every intentional homicide was capital, Death Row would number in tens of thousands nationwide. What particular aggravating factor makes this capital?

 

[Bill - Shy Cat]

Several attorneys on this thread have called this a death penalty case. How is this possibly a death penalty case as opposed to vanilla murder? I have no idea why this sheriff did this, and am not inclined to sympathy for him.

Still, how is this a death case? If every intentional homicide was capital, Death Row would number in tens of thousands nationwide. What particular aggravating factor makes this capital?

Good question. I'm of the opinion that most murderers should face the death penalty, unless very unusual circumstances dictate otherwise.

 

[WildcatofNati2]

Good question. I'm of the opinion that most murderers should face the death penalty, unless very unusual circumstances dictate otherwise.

Fair enough, but the law is precisely the opposite in every state, except perhaps Texas lol.

 

[Hank Camacho]

One of the aggravating factors from KRS 532.025 to make a crime eligible for the death penalty in Kentucky is that the act of killing was (1) intentional and (2) of a public official. Number 2 is easily established. At this point it would appear likeliest that the big argument will be whether it was "intentional" legally speaking.

 

[Someguywhodoesntlikeyou]

One of the aggravating factors from KRS 532.025 to make a crime eligible for the death penalty in Kentucky is that the act of killing was (1) intentional and (2) of a public official. Number 2 is easily established. At this point it would appear likeliest that the big argument will be whether it was "intentional" legally speaking.

Does that “intentional” mean premeditated? Or are there other factors?

 

[WildcatofNati2]

One of the aggravating factors from KRS 532.025 to make a crime eligible for the death penalty in Kentucky is that the act of killing was (1) intentional and (2) of a public official. Number 2 is easily established. At this point it would appear likeliest that the big argument will be whether it was "intentional" legally speaking.

Thanks, although the statute also requires that it happened in the "course" of public duties. Does that require that the killing relates to work duties, or is it sufficient if it happens while he's at work?
I'm not trying to be difficult, but if there's going to be death, shouldn't it be unequivocally applied?

 

[Hank Camacho]

Thanks, although the statute also requires that it happened in the "course" of public duties.

I don't see that in the statute. It says "public official". What you are talking about may be in the case law, I don't know. That is not my area of expertise.

Here's KRS 532.025(2)(a)(7) straight from Decis:

7. The offender’s act of killing was intentional and the victim was:
a. A state or local public official; or
b. A first responder, as defined in KRS 507.070;

The judge was shot in his chambers, in his robe, at 3 pm. Unless the sheriff testifies, I can't possibly see how there would be an argument that the judge was not a public official.