Jai Burgess
At approximately 6:45 p.m. on Saturday, Oct. 25, police responded to a shooting on Macey Avenue following a 911 call, according to Versailles Police Chief Rob Young.
Officers and detectives conducted an investigation, which is ongoing, and determined a dispute had arisen involving three individuals, which resulted in numerous shots being fired into a vehicle, seriously injuring a minor.
The injuries were described by Young as non-life-threatening, and the victim was transported to the University of Kentucky Medical Center. Though there are several Facebook posts purporting to identify the victim, the Sun does not publish the names of minors who are crime victims without the consent of the person and family.
Police arrested Jai Burgess of Versailles on charges of first-degree assault and first-degree wanton endangerment relating to the shooting. Burgess was arraigned on Monday, Oct. 24, in Woodford District Court, where a public defender was appointed to represent him.
Burgess remains in custody at the Woodford County Detention Center on a $50,000 “all cash” bail, though his public defender and his girlfriend attempted to have the bond reduced, which County Attorney Alan George opposed and the court refused.
His next court appearance will be Nov. 3 at 1:30 p.m., for a preliminary hearing at which time the court will determine if there is sufficient probable cause that Burgess committed the crimes. If so, the matter will then be sent to the Woodford County Grand Jury to decide whether to indict him.
In the police report of the shooting, Burgess claims the driver of the vehicle into which he fired shots was brandishing a gun at him. Chief Young was unable to comment further as the incident remains under investigation, except to confirm the driver of the vehicle that was shot up was not arrested.
Prior to the shooting, Burgess was no stranger to Woodford County District Court. Aside from a marijuana possession conviction for which he was fined $150 and is still paying on, he had been charged on two separate occasions for the same thing: felony strangulation and misdemeanor domestic assault. The victim in both cases is his girlfriend, who, according to George, has refused to cooperate with any of the prosecutions and instead said he acted in self-defense when, as she claims, she attacked him. The Sun’s policy is not to name any victim of a domestic assault without their express consent, instead identifying the person only as the “victim-girlfriend.”
The first event occurred with Burgess’ arrest on April 26, 2025. George informed the Sun that the victim-girlfriend contacted him, saying she wanted Burgess released, claiming it was she who attacked Burgess, he acted in self-defense, did not strangle her, she would not testify against him, and that she wanted the charges dismissed. George advised her to seek an emergency protective order (EPO), and she declined.
Given her statements to police, George had her appear in court to confirm what she told him under oath; otherwise, George would proceed to prosecute the strangulation. Regardless, George told the Sun that he told her the domestic assault charge would not be dismissed since Burgess admitted to the police that he pinned the victim-girlfriend down and struck her. As evidenced by the court record, the victim-girlfriend did appear before the judge and repeated what she had told George. This led George to dismiss the strangulation charge, and Burgess pleaded guilty to the domestic assault, receiving a 10-day sentence.
Burgess was next arrested on Aug. 11, 2025, on the same two charges for a new assault. Again, according to George, the victim-girlfriend called him the next day, insisting Burgess was innocent and she would swear to that in court as she had done before. She again declined George’s recommendation to obtain an EPO.
After eight days in jail, at Burgess’ next court appearance and the victim-girlfriend’s insistence, the court lowered the bond to $500 cash. Burgess posted the bond and was released. Once again, she refused to seek an EPO and said she would not testify against him and that he did not strangle her.
According to court records, this second domestic assault case is scheduled for a status review on Monday, Nov. 3, 2025. A preliminary hearing in the shooting case is also scheduled for the same time.
“We will deal with both of those cases Monday, (Nov. 3),” said George.
“So, yes, (Burgess) was technically out on bond on a strangulation charge when the shooting happened, which he is claiming was (done) in self-defense and which the victims deny. The evidence available to us thus far supports the victims’ position,” George said in an email to the Sun. “It should be noted, (the two) strangulation cases did not involve a firearm, so this was our first exposure to him having one. Nor had the victims of the Saturday (Oct. 25) shooting ever been brought to our attention as being on Burgess’ radar, or (Burgess) on theirs. We had no knowledge of whatever the root cause was for this shooting. That picture will hopefully become clearer (at the court hearing on) Monday.”