A court ruling on Friday put an involuntary manslaughter case against Alec Baldwin on track for trial in early July as a judge denied a request to dismiss the case on complaints that key evidence was damaged by the FBI during forensic testing.
Judge Mary Marlowe Sommer sided with prosecutors in rejecting a motion to dismiss the case.
Defense attorneys had argued that the gun in the fatal shooting was heavily damaged during FBI forensic testing before it could be examined for possible modifications or problems that might exonerate the actor-producer.
The ruling removes one of the last hurdles before prosecutors can bring the case to trial with jury selection scheduled for July 9 in Santa Fe.
At trial, attorneys plan to call on witnesses from a court-approved list of more than 60 people. They include film director Joel Souza, who was wounded in the shooting as well as assistant director Dave Halls, who earlier pleaded no contest to negligent use of a deadly weapon, and an array of first responders, investigators, firearms experts and close-range witnesses to the shooting.
Baldwin isn't listed but has the right to testify at his own trial.
During a rehearsal on the set of the Western film “Rust” in 2021, Baldwin pointed a gun at cinematographer Halyna Hutchins when the revolver went off, killing her and injuring director Souza as the bullet became lodged in his shoulder. Baldwin has maintained that he pulled back the gun’s hammer but not the trigger and has pleaded not guilty.
The FBI conducted an accidental discharge test on the gun by striking it from several angles with a rawhide mallet, eventually breaking the gun. Prosecutors plan to present evidence at trial that they say shows the firearm “could not have fired absent a pull of the trigger” and was working properly before the shooting.
Baldwin has twice been charged in Hutchins’ death. Prosecutors dismissed an earlier charge, then refiled it after receiving a new analysis of the revolver that Baldwin pointed at Hutchins.
“Rust” armorer Hannah Gutierrez-Reed is serving an 18 month sentence on a conviction for involuntary manslaughter in the fatal shooting, as she appeals the jury verdict. It's likely the prosecutors will call her to testify at Baldwin's trial, despite her refusal to answer questions at a pretrial interview and instead invoke her constitutional rights against self-incrimination under the Fifth Amendment. A judge refused a request to compel her testimony by providing immunity.
Marlowe Sommer said that destruction of internal components of the firearm “is not highly prejudicial” to a fair trial and that Baldwin's legal team failed to demonstrate bad faith by investigators.
While Baldwin “contends that an unaltered firearm is critical to his case, other evidence concerning the functionality of the firearm on Oct. 21, 2021, weighs against the defendant’s assertions,” the judge wrote.
Sheriff’s investigators initially sent the revolver to the FBI for routine testing, but when an FBI analyst heard Baldwin say in an ABC TV interview that he never pulled the trigger, the agency told local authorities they could conduct an accidental discharge test, though it might damage the gun.
The FBI was told by a team of investigators to go ahead, and tested the revolver by striking it from several angles with a rawhide mallet. One of those strikes fractured the gun’s firing and safety mechanisms.
Defense attorneys say that the “outrageous” decision to move forward with testing may have destroyed exculpatory evidence.
Prosecutors said it was “unfortunate” the gun broke, but it wasn’t destroyed and the parts are still available. They say Baldwin’s attorneys still have the ability to defend their client and question the evidence against him.
In Friday's ruling, the judge said prosecutors will have to fully disclose at trial the destructive nature of the FBI forensic testing on the gun, including what was lost in the process and its relevance in reaching a verdict.
Several hours of testimony about the gun and forensic testing during online hearings in recent days provided a dress rehearsal for the possible trial against Baldwin. Attorneys for Baldwin gave long and probing cross-examinations of the lead detective, an FBI forensic firearm investigator and the prosecution’s independent gun expert, Lucien Haag.
Prosecutors plan to present evidence that they say shows the firearm “could not have fired absent a pull of the trigger” and was working properly before the shooting.
Since the 2021 shooting, the filming of “Rust” resumed but moved to Montana under an agreement with Hutchins’ husband, Matthew Hutchins, which made him an executive producer. The completed movie has not yet been released for public viewing.
© Copyright 2024 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed without permission.
18 Comments
Login to comment
Toblerone
“Rust” armorer Hannah Gutierrez-Reed is serving an 18 month sentence on a conviction for involuntary manslaughter in the fatal shooting,
Hopefully this means she will never work as an armorer again.
Japantime
He is a movie star and it was an accident. Why is there a case? It has happened before and the people have gotten off.
Kaowaiinekochanknaw
Hang him high.
Not for the murder, just for his terrible so-called 'comedy' and 'acting'.
Shudders.
ebisen
He was a movie star :) is absolutely not relevant at all in a country where justice works.
It was an accident? Of course. But we can't let those responsible just walk free. The question is: was it preventable? Who's mistake caused it?
By US law, Baldwin was at least responsible for checking the weapon (which he knew it was real) and making sure it is safe to handle himself, before handling it. This is a fact and it makes it already more than enough reason to indict and not to dismiss.
thelonius
Good. I just can't buy his explanation that he never pulled the trigger. How is that possible? Do bullets have a fuse?
That said. If someone hands you a gun and says it's safe. Would you have any reason to doubt that? As a defense, that makes more sense to be. Claiming you didn't pull the trigger just sounds silly.
Eastmann
he likes to play a big MAN but this time...jail
Toblerone
Every gun is considered unsafe until checked by the person who is holding it.
Hervé L'Eisa
He was criminally reckless and careless while handling a real firearm. His recklessness is what caused the gun to fire and to kill the woman. 100% his fault.
falseflagsteve
From what I understand he is prone to random fits of rage and abusive behaviour where he appears to have lost his mind. Who knows if this incident occurred not by accident but by the dark forces, possibly demonic that torment him.
nukkuheddo
why would any weapon on a movie set have live rounds in it?
Matt
This is my question too....Why were live rounds on a movie set?
Hawk
Well, that doesn't make sense. How do you check if a weapon is safe before handling it?
Anyway, gun safety recommendations like 'treat every gun as if it's loaded,' and 'don't point it at anything you're not ready to destroy' are guidelines, not laws. Negligence and recklessness and the like don't come into play until something terrible happens, as it did here.
tigerjane
I am no fan of this guy, however, what if the lady who got shot down asked him to practice the scene and he did what she asked. This was supposed to be a prop gun with nothing inside he could not have known it was not his job to know and he may have never shot a real gun and would not have known how to even begin to check. Myself, I have never touched a gun in my life would not even know how to check a gun for ammo and I have no interest to either it is not my cup of tea.
Rounding up, I think this guy should not be prosecuted in my opinion based on my points.
zibala
Lock him up!
Brian Wheway
If the gun was faulty, it should have been checked by the armour, before any firing took place, as for the FBI check, tapping it with a leather hammer, well that's fine, but if it wasn't faulty in the first place it could be by now, how hard do you have to hit it before it breaks? There built very well tbh, and now it's broken? What? I am so uncomfortable with this, the FBI needs to explain how they tested it, if the trigger was faulty, a gentle tap should service, or even try it loaded on one of there ranges under CCTV, but to break a gun? It must have been hit hard,
ebisen
You check if it's loaded or not FIRST! If you see anything resembling a bullet, take them out, as this was just a practice run. Also, you're supposed to check if the bullets are blank, before the actual scene shooting happens. All of this is the responsibility of the person holding the gun.
ebisen
The gun went off as he was searching for a good camera angle, (together with the person he killed). It didn't want of in the second he touched it. He had time to check it before dicking around with it.
Hawk
ebisen,
Yes, you're right, but you have to do all that while handling the weapon. Perhaps you meant 'brandish' or 'aim' the weapon.
*"By US law, Baldwin was at least responsible for checking the weapon (which he knew it was real) and making sure it is safe to handle himself, before handling it."*