Physical Address
304 North Cardinal St.
Dorchester Center, MA 02124
FIRST ON FOX: Fox News Digital has obtained crucial surveillance footage showcasing the tense moments preceding the suspected murder of former Letcher County Sheriff Shawn “Mickey” Stines, who is accused of killing former Kentucky 47th Judicial District Judge Kevin Mullins. This incident, which transpired in the small town of Whitesburg on September 19, 2024, has sent shockwaves through the community, especially as new insights emerge regarding the motive behind the tragic shooting.
The sheriff and the judge had a longstanding relationship that dates back years, which makes the circumstances of the killing all the more alarming. In the hours prior to the shooting, they shared lunch with a group of friends and colleagues, engaging in friendly conversation. Nevertheless, the mood quickly shifted.
Surveillance Footage Chronicles Final Moments
Surveillance video taken from Mullins’ chambers reveals a group of individuals chatting with the judge amicably for over twelve minutes. Some of these individuals had been present during the lunch at StreetSide Grill & Bar, just a short walk from both the courthouse and county jail. The atmosphere seemed relaxed, a stark contrast to the violence that would follow.
Once this gathering concluded, Sheriff Stines entered Mullins’ office and requested a private conversation, effectively clearing out the room. Body language expert Susan Constantine analyzed the situation, stating, “When I observe the sheriff, it’s intriguing to watch his demeanor as he walked in. He appeared ready to act immediately, shuffling his feet with his hands in his pockets.”
In stark contrast, Mullins appeared despondent, seemingly oblivious to Stines’ intentions at that moment.
Tensions Escalate Prior to the Shooting
During the ensuing seven minutes, the two men engaged in a private discussion, during which Stines reportedly locked the door. Constantine noted that while Stines appeared fixated on their conversation, Mullins remained relaxed, projecting an air of nonchalance during an increasingly precarious situation.
As the conversation progressed, Stines leaned in closer to Mullins, suggesting he had something significant on his mind. Constantine commented that Mullins’ casual attitude likely aggravated Stines’ increasingly volatile emotions.
“The more carefree Mullins acted, the more tension built against him in Stines’ mind. It wasn’t just dismissive behavior; it escalated Stines’ frustration,” Constantine elaborated.
In a surprising move, Mullins handed his phone to Stines—a rarely discussed circumstance leading to significant speculation among true crime enthusiasts. After scrolling through the judge’s contacts, Stines attempted to make a call that went unanswered, resulting in his throwing the phone back onto Mullins’ desk.
The Fatal Encounter
Witnesses allege that Stines then drew his firearm and approached Mullins menacingly before firing at him from point-blank range. Constantine remarked that Mullins did not seem to comprehend the imminent danger until it was almost too late. “He was seemingly confused, gesturing with his hands as if to say, ‘What are you doing? Put the gun down’,” she recalled. “He initially did not grasp the severity of the situation. It wasn’t until a few moments later that he shifted to a defensive stance, realizing the gravity of the situation, but it was then that Stines seized the opportunity to act. That was when the tragedy occurred.”
Constantine disputes any assertions suggesting the crime was a spur-of-the-moment action, arguing instead that it appeared premeditated, a strategic move carefully planned by Stines.
Legal Insights Into the Incident
In a recent phone interview, Stines’ attorney Jeremy Bartley, along with his wife and co-counsel Kerri Bartley, addressed online speculations surrounding the phone exchange. They clarified that it was not about any personal connection between Mullins and Stines’ family.
“During that day, Stines had attempted several times to reach out to his daughter, including while in the judge’s chambers,” Jeremy Bartley explained. He detailed how Stines received a call from his aunt while still in the conversation with Mullins. More importantly, he asserted that Mullins was undergoing a period of heightened paranoia regarding his family’s safety due to a civil lawsuit in which he was named.
Complex Background Creates Tension
Recent findings indicate that, leading up to the incident, Mullins had been grappling with intense emotional strain stemming from a deposition in a civil lawsuit that implicated him and Stines. The lawsuit was filed by Sabrina Adkins in January 2024, following the conviction of former Deputy Ben Fields for serious crimes against her. This lawsuit alleged that Mullins’ chambers housed the predatory activities that subjected Adkins and other women to abuse.
Bartley pointed out that Stines was deposed just three days before the shooting. He explained that this civil suit attracted significant attention towards the activities occurring within the courthouse, evidenced by the unusual placement of a security camera in Mullins’ chambers—an alert to the growing tensions.
Adding to the pressure, Bartley described how many of Stines’ peers urged him to remain silent during the depositions concerning courthouse incidents. Stines reportedly believed that threats loomed over both him and his family due to the sensitive nature of the case.
Understanding the Relationship Between Stines and Mullins
Despite their long acquaintance, Bartley characterized the relationship between Stines and Mullins as strictly professional. “They were not friends in a social sense but rather colleagues tied by their responsibilities in the field,” he said.
Currently, Stines faces a charge of first-degree murder of a public official. Bartley maintains that the defense will argue the act was not premeditated, but rather a tragic outcome of accumulated social and emotional pressures.
Attempts to reach prosecuting attorney Jackie Steele for comments were unsuccessful, leaving many questions unanswered.
An Ongoing Investigation
This case continues to draw attention across Kentucky, raising critical questions about the stability of public officials and the emotional health necessary for their duties. As the investigation unfolds, the community watches closely, seeking justice for all involved.
