Court documents reveal questions that led grand jury to indict former Kentucky sheriff

WHITESBURG, Ky. (FOX 56) — The Commonwealth has made its argument, urging the court to uphold the indictment of former Letcher County Sheriff Shawn “Mickey” Stines.

A grand jury returned an indictment in the shooting death of District Judge Kevin Mullins in November 2024. Investigators believe that Stines pulled the trigger.

On Friday, June 27, prosecutors filed their response to defense attorney Jeremy Bartley’s requests for bond and dismissal of the 2024 indictment.

Earlier in June, Bartley claimed that a grand jury meeting wasn’t properly documented and that grand jurors were denied access to certain information that, had they heard it in testimony, could have rendered a different result.

“No testimony was provided to obtain those records; therefore, there is no recording,” prosecutors wrote regarding the October 2024 meeting.

In November 2024, sworn testimony was presented to a grand jury about the September shooting that left the Letcher County judge dead. According to court documents, Detective Clayton Stamper was the Commonwealth’s only witness, and jurors were allowed to ask questions, affirming no information was denied.

The documents delve into what exactly was discussed with grand jurors in light of Bartley’s arguments. In the June 4 filing, he argued that Stamper testified Stines was “in his sane mind” at the time of the shooting.

“The only comment along those lines was in response to a question from a grand juror. At
the 26:17 mark of the grand jury recording, a grand juror asked Det. Stamper, ‘So he was in sane
mind as far as this investigation has gone?’ Det. Stamper simply responded, ‘Yes.’ While the Defendant is correct that Det. Stamper does not have the expert qualifications to comment on the Defendant’s mental state at a criminal trial, such testimony is not prohibited,” prosecutors wrote.

Further questions were disclosed in the filing, mostly surrounding Stine’s state of mind at the time of the shooting, his medical history, and his involvement in an ongoing lawsuit.

“Is there a list of medications that he is taking?” one grand juror inquired.

Stamper reportedly testified he’d not personally reviewed Stines’ medication list, but that they were available to the grand jury for review.

“The only question presented pertaining to a pending civil case came at the 24:09 mark of
the recording when a grand juror said, ‘So, you said the ongoing lawsuit against the Sheriff’s
Office. Did Judge Mullins have any relation to that case in any way?” prosecutors wrote.

Stamper answered, “No…not.”

Prosecutors then clarified, “To your knowledge, was Judge Mullins involved?”

Stamper testified, “To my knowledge, no. No involvement.”

“This was the sole question from a grand juror that could be attributed to the civil case referenced in the Defendant’s Motion,” the Commonwealth wrote.

Grand jurors were also reportedly shown security camera footage from Mullins’ chambers that captured the deadly shooting, then elected to indict Stines on one count of murder of a public official.

The Commonwealth called Bartley’s suggestion that grand jurors were denied access to certain information an “incredibly serious allegation” that was “proffered without any support either on the face of the motion or in the record.”

Stines was set for psychiatric evaluation in June, the results of which are confidential. His next hearing has not been scheduled.