One Year Later, the Mullins Murder Case Still Shakes Letcher County

It’s been a year since Letcher County Sheriff Shawn “Mickey” Stines walked into Judge Kevin Mullins’s chambers, locked the door, and shot him nine times. The killing of a sitting judge by the county’s top lawman stunned eastern Kentucky and grabbed national headlines. A year later, the case isn’t any less messy. In fact, it might be even more complicated now.

A Sheriff Coming Apart

Court filings and local reporting paint a picture of a man unraveling in the days leading up to the murder. Friends said Stines was paranoid, convinced his house was bugged, and so fearful he’d drag his wife out of bed at night just so they could whisper down the street. Co-workers said he obsessed over Facebook comments, even calling people who reacted negatively to his posts.

His lawyers say that paranoia wasn’t just a personality quirk, it was an “extreme emotional disturbance.” They’re pushing to have his indictment tossed, arguing investigators misled the grand jury about his mental state.

The defense has even floated claims, unverified and often based on courthouse gossip, that Judge Mullins himself might’ve been entangled in misconduct. Whether those allegations go anywhere, they’ve become part of the larger strategy: paint Stines as a man who snapped under unbearable pressure.

The Rumor Mill Goes Wild

If the courtroom drama wasn’t enough, social media has poured gasoline on the fire. Two men with loose ties to the case, Jailer Brian Slone and minister Michael Clark, say they’ve been stalked and filmed by online commentators.

Slone said he found a video of himself walking to lunch posted online without his knowledge. Clark said people actually followed him more than 100 miles to record a recovery talk he gave, then chopped it up and threw it online with nasty commentary. He’s also been accused of sending explicit videos, which he flatly denies. Both men say morale in the jail and courthouse is in the gutter thanks to nonstop rumors. I should note that I’ve seen an unedited explicit video of Clark. Seems pretty recent, too.

It’s a reminder that in 2025, high-profile cases don’t just play out in court, they play out on Facebook timelines and TikTok feeds, too.

Legal Chess in the Courtroom

Now, let’s talk about where this case really stands: the legal tug-of-war.

Venue. Prosecutors want the trial moved out of Letcher County, claiming it’s impossible to find an unbiased jury there. The defense is having none of it. Their argument is basically, “If this case is too high-profile for Whitesburg, it’s too high-profile for anywhere.” They point out that Court TV has aired every hearing and national outlets have been all over it, so good luck finding twelve people in Kentucky who haven’t seen the video of Stines pulling the trigger. On top of that, they argue that moving the trial would strip Eastern Kentuckians of their right to sit in judgment of one of their own.

Mental health. Stines already went through a psych evaluation at the state psychiatric center. His lawyers say that’s plenty, and letting prosecutors order another one would be like giving them a second chance because they didn’t like the first result. Prosecutors see it differently. They argue that since Stines is raising an insanity defense, they’ve got every right to bring in their own expert to challenge it. One side says a second exam would be unfair and delay the trial. The other side says it’s essential to getting at the truth.

This fight matters. If the jury believes Stines was paranoid to the point of psychosis, that could shape whether they see him as a cold-blooded killer or a man who lost touch with reality.

The Bigger Picture

So where does that leave Letcher County? One year later, the courthouse isn’t just the scene of a murder, it’s ground zero for a battle over mental health, fairness, and the reach of social media.

A sheriff killed a judge, and the fallout keeps spreading. The legal questions of where to hold the trial and how to handle his mental health defense, are still unresolved. And in the meantime, regular people are finding themselves dragged into the spotlight against their will.

If anything, this case shows how a single act of violence can expose cracks running through an entire community. And as the trial date creeps closer, it looks like those cracks are only going to widen.