Kentucky Sheriff Shoots and Kills Judge in his Chambers, After Going to Lunch Together and Exchanging Cell Phones: The Sheriff Reportedly Killed the Judge for Raping His Daughter

The Tweet

According to the Mountain Eagle, District Judge Kevin Mullins and Sheriff Mickey Stines exchanged phones.

When Stines was apparently unhappy with what he found, he opened fire on the judge.

Stines was previously Mullins' bailiff before he became sheriff in 2018.

The two had lunch together just hours before the incident.

Sheriff Stines later went to the courthouse to speak with Mullins. They then went to the judge's office, where they continued their conversation.

A short conversation took place before the sheriff got up and locked the door. Both men then took out their cell phones and handed them to each other.

Stines then got up and pulled out his gun, walked around the desk and repeatedly shot Mullins who passed.

It's unclear what the argument was about but an unconfirmed report claims the sheriff found out the judge had r*ped his daughter.

Source: https://x.com/collinrugg/status/1837313289631813662?s=46

The Video Press Release

The Thread

---

The CBS News Post

Source: https://x.com/cbseveningnews/status/1837271631279865994?s=46

The Video is Not Available for Download

The Thread

Another Tweet

Source: https://x.com/nicksortor/status/1836937860210958590?s=46

---

The Video

The Documents

The Full Court Documents

…

Source: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/65590626/adkins-v-fields/

---

A Final Tweet

---

Jury Nullification

There are differing perspectives on the role and basis of jury nullification in American jurisprudence. Some view jury nullification as a right, but there are examples of people being punished for disseminating the information. For instance, two people passed out pamphlets about jury nullification in Colorado and were later arrested and charged with jury tampering. Indeed, jury nullification is technically a discretionary act, and is not a legally sanctioned function of the jury. As such, jury nullification is considered to be inconsistent with the jury's duty to return a verdict based solely on the law and the facts of the case, and counsel is not permitted to present the concept of jury nullification to the jury.

However, there is a historical basis for jury nullification. Its origin is seen where juries in colonial America used jury nullification to protest the British by acquitting defendants. There are other historical examples as well. For instance, in the 1800s Congress passed the Fugitive Slave Clause, which compelled citizens of all states to assist law enforcement “with the apprehension of suspected runaway slaves.” Some abolitionists used the jury system to protest and refused to convict people under these laws; this was also seen with prohibition laws. 

States also differ on jury nullification. In California, Judge Jan Goldsmith requested an opinion about jury nullification (related to the case Sparf v. United States) in which the decision was that the California trial jury did not have the right to refuse to apply the law. The Supreme Court case Kleinman v. United States confirms this sentiment. 

See also: U.S. v. Thomas, 116 F.3d 606 (2d Cir. 1997); People v. Douglas, 178 Misc. 2d 918, 680 N.Y.S.2d 145 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 1998); United States v. Manzano (In re United States), 945 F.3d 616 (2d Cir. 2019)

[Last updated in October of 2022 by the Wex Definitions Team]

Source: https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/jury_nullification

---