Whitesburg, KY — A shocking incident in Letcher County has captured national attention as Shawn “Mickey” Stines, the local sheriff, stands accused of the fatal shooting of District Judge Kevin Mullins. The ordeal, which unfolded in the judge’s chambers on September 19, was described by defense attorney Jeremy Bartley as impulsive and driven by “extreme emotional disturbance.”
Stines, 43, who ascended from the role of court bailiff to sheriff in 2018, apparently fired multiple times at Mullins, 54, who was seated at his desk, as highlighted in a silent video clip presented during a preliminary hearing. This unexpected act of violence has stunned the community where both men were well-known figures.
During the hearing, Bartley suggested the shooting “occurred in the heat of passion,” arguing against premeditation. “We believe there had to be a compelling reason for Sheriff Stines to feel like he had to take action,” said Bartley, hinting at complexities yet to be unveiled which might explain the extreme reaction.
The longstanding relationship between Stines and Mullins as colleagues and friends adds a poignant layer to the tragedy, deeply affecting the residents of Letcher County. “It practically immobilized us,” remarked Garnard Kincer Jr., former mayor of Jenkins and a friend of Mullins, expressing the widespread disbelief within the community.
Details about the events leading up to the shooting emerged during the hearing. Kentucky State Police Detective Clayton Stamper testified that the two men had dined together earlier that day. Unfolding further, Stamper noted a curious interaction involving attempts by Stines to use his and Mullins’ phones to reach his daughter, subsequently finding her number stored on Mullins’ phone.
The reason behind Mullins’ invitation to Stines into his chambers remains speculative, but Stamper suggested it could be linked to what transpired or was discovered during the phone incident. This development hints at potential underlying issues that may have escalated the conflict to a deadly conclusion.
Stines, who has since resigned from his role as sheriff and asserted his innocence by pleading not guilty, remains calm and has urged fair treatment through his interactions with the authorities according to Stamper. As the case progresses, Bartley emphasizes the defense’s readiness to reveal more about Stines’ side of the story.
The full circumstances surrounding this case continue to unfold, leaving the community and observers waiting anxiously for clarity. As the case is set to advance to a grand jury, all involved brace for further revelations that could shed light on this tragic convergence of personal relationship and professional duty gone awry.