Judge Upholds Involuntary Manslaughter Indictment Against Alec Baldwin in 'Rust' Shooting

[Social Media]

 

A New Mexico judge has denied Alec Baldwin's motion to dismiss the involuntary manslaughter indictment stemming from the fatal 2021 shooting on the set of the film "Rust." The incident resulted in the death of cinematographer Halyna Hutchins and injury to director Joel Souza, bringing intense scrutiny and legal challenges to Baldwin and the production team. The case has been fraught with controversy since the day of the shooting. During a scene rehearsal on the western movie set in New Mexico, a firearm held by Baldwin discharged a live round, leading to Hutchins' tragic death and Souza's injury. Baldwin has maintained that he was unaware the gun was loaded with live ammunition, sparking a heated debate over safety protocols on film sets.

 

In January 2023, Baldwin pleaded not guilty to the initial charges of involuntary manslaughter. These charges were dropped later in the year due to prosecutors citing insufficient time and evidence to proceed. However, new developments in the investigation led to Baldwin being charged and indicted again in January 2024. Baldwin’s legal team moved to dismiss the indictment in March, accusing the prosecutors of misconduct during the grand jury process. They argued that the prosecutors presented false and misleading testimony, withheld exculpatory evidence, and gave improper and prejudicial instructions to the grand jury. Baldwin's lawyers claimed that the prosecution had "publicly dragged Baldwin through the cesspool created by their improprieties," disregarding the severe nature of the charges that had been hanging over Baldwin for more than two years.

 

Special prosecutors in New Mexico countered these allegations, defending their handling of the case. They argued that Baldwin’s behavior on the "Rust" set contributed to the safety lapses that led to the shooting. The prosecutors asserted that they had followed proper procedures and there was no prosecutorial bad faith involved. The judge's decision to deny Baldwin's motion was based on a detailed review of the grand jury transcripts from January 18 and 19, 2024. The judge concluded that there was no evidence of intentional misconduct or dishonesty by the prosecuting attorney. In the ruling, the judge stated, "After review of transcripts from the January 18, 2024 and January 19, 2024 grand jury presentations, the Court does not find that the ‘prosecuting attorney assisting the grand jury’ engaged in ‘intentional misconduct’ reflecting ‘dishonesty of belief, purpose, or motive’ in the course of the attorney’s ‘presentation of evidence to the grand jury.’"

 

This ruling keeps Baldwin firmly in the legal spotlight as he prepares to face trial. In a brief statement to CNN following the judge’s decision, Baldwin’s legal team, represented by Luke Nikas and Alex Spiro, expressed their readiness for the upcoming court proceedings: "We look forward to our day in court." The legal challenges extend beyond Baldwin. Hannah Gutierrez Reed, the film's armorer responsible for the safety and storage of firearms on the set, was found guilty of involuntary manslaughter in March. She was sentenced to 18 months in prison and is currently appealing her conviction. Reed's role in the events leading up to the shooting has been a critical component of the investigation, with many arguing that she bore significant responsibility for ensuring the firearm was safe to use.

 

The "Rust" shooting incident has also sparked broader discussions about safety standards in the film industry. The tragic death of Hutchins highlighted the potential dangers of working with firearms on set and has led to calls for stricter regulations and safety protocols to prevent similar accidents in the future. As Baldwin's case proceeds, it will undoubtedly continue to draw significant public and media attention. The outcome of this high-profile case may not only impact Baldwin's career but also set a precedent for how legal accountability is addressed in cases of accidental shootings in the entertainment industry.

 

The judge’s decision to uphold the indictment signifies that the court found sufficient grounds to proceed with the charges against Baldwin.

 

Credit: CNN 2024-05-25

 

Get our Daily Newsletter - Click HERE to subscribe

 

 

[klauskunkel]

His fault. Every time you pick up gun you immediately check if it is loaded, it's a simple procedure and takes 2 seconds. It's called gun safety.

[Purdey]

How many actors check their guns for live rounds? Why would a Hollywood gun have live rounds on set? Did the armorer in the Crow go to prison when Brandon Lee was killed?

So many questions.

[CanadaSam]

He's filming a movie, there happens to be a person specifically in charge of weapons, whose sole duty is to ensure the weapons are safe to discharge (blanks).

 

So when he shoots it, he, and everybody else on set is absolutely sure it is safe to do so, there is no doubt about that, in anybody's minds!

 

In no way is he responsible, in much the same way as if a car is stolen and kills some people, the owner of the car is not responsible in any way.

[riclag]

Im willing to succeed that hollywood & entertainment movie & game business all over the world should not be allowed to use guns & gun violence in their business ventures.

Promoting gun violence in gaming , music & movies is detrimental to society.

[EVENKEEL]

50 minutes ago, CanadaSam said:

He's filming a movie, there happens to be a person specifically in charge of weapons, whose sole duty is to ensure the weapons are safe to discharge (blanks).

 

So when he shoots it, he, and everybody else on set is absolutely sure it is safe to do so, there is no doubt about that, in anybody's minds!

 

In no way is he responsible, in much the same way as if a car is stolen and kills some people, the owner of the car is not responsible in any way.

Apples and oranges. Every time an actor takes possession of a weapon they should be responsible for doing a safety check. 

 

 

[transam]

2 hours ago, klauskunkel said:

His fault. Every time you pick up gun you immediately check if it is loaded, it's a simple procedure and takes 2 seconds. It's called gun safety.

Rubbish, it was an actor on a film set where a PAID expert was in attendance to ensure safety.

It takes a while to learn how to be safe with a gun, I know.

The PAID safety was at fault, not an untrained actor...🥴 

[transam]

25 minutes ago, riclag said:

Im willing to succeed that hollywood & entertainment movie & game business all over the world should not be allowed to use guns & gun violence in their business ventures.

Promoting gun violence in gaming , music & movies is detrimental to society.

😂...........What a load, Reverend, John Wick supports will be....🙄......at your goodie two shoes approach.......😂

[transam]

10 minutes ago, EVENKEEL said:

Apples and oranges. Every time an actor takes possession of a weapon they should be responsible for doing a safety check. 

 

 

So tell us the difference between a dummy and a live round by looking at it...........?   

 

"Actors must be proficient with firearms", so why do filmmakers PAY FOR an expert on sight to deal with weapons and ammo safety........🤣

[Sheryl]

Has anyone explained how and why live bullets even got on the set let alone in the gun?

[transam]

1 minute ago, Sheryl said:

Has anyone explained how and why live bullets even got on the set let alone in the gun?

All down to the safety lady. I suspect live rounds were to be used at some time during the film, probably not by Baldwin, so all down to her......🤕

[Sheryl]

12 minutes ago, transam said:

All down to the safety lady. I suspect live rounds were to be used at some time during the film, probably not by Baldwin, so all down to her......🤕

For what reaso  would live rounds ever be used while making a film? 

[transam]

3 minutes ago, Sheryl said:

For what reaso  would live rounds ever be used while making a film? 

To destroy something, even our yesterday cowboy films had live rounds to see things being popped, but, the gun safety folk deal with that stuff, the safety lady in question messed up........🤗  

[EVENKEEL]

17 minutes ago, transam said:

So tell us the difference between a dummy and a live round by looking at it...........?   

 

"Actors must be proficient with firearms", so why do filmmakers PAY FOR an expert on sight to deal with weapons and ammo safety........🤣

Anyone who carries a gun should be proficient in Gun safety. Checking for dummy rounds would add a layer of safety checks. Much like during real small arms training when I'm handed a gun from Armory I make sure it's clear and safe in front of trainer. Just because the trainer made the gun clear and safe before he stored the weapon in a secured armory, I do it again when I take possession.

 

Checking for dummy rounds would add another layer of safety checks. No reason the actor couldn't be part of the checking process. And, to add to the confusion I've read that others possibly had possession of the gun before Baldwin held it.

[transam]

2 minutes ago, EVENKEEL said:

Anyone who carries a gun should be proficient in Gun safety. Checking for dummy rounds would add a layer of safety checks. Much like during real small arms training when I'm handed a gun from Armory I make sure it's clear and safe in front of trainer. Just because the trainer made the gun clear and safe before he stored the weapon in a secured armory, I do it again when I take possession.

 

Checking for dummy rounds would add another layer of safety checks. No reason the actor couldn't be part of the checking process. And, to add to the confusion I've read that others possibly had possession of the gun before Baldwin held it.

Gawd, that is what the safety lady is paid for, the lady messed up..........🙄

I could make you up a dummy round that looks exactly like a live one, you only know it is live using it in a gun ...

Edited May 25 by transam

[riclag]

7 minutes ago, EVENKEEL said:

Anyone who carries a gun should be proficient in Gun safety. Checking for dummy rounds would add a layer of safety checks. Much like during real small arms training when I'm handed a gun from Armory I make sure it's clear and safe in front of trainer. Just because the trainer made the gun clear and safe before he stored the weapon in a secured armory, I do it again when I take possession.

 

Checking for dummy rounds would add another layer of safety checks. No reason the actor couldn't be part of the checking process. And, to add to the confusion I've read that others possibly had possession of the gun before Baldwin held it.

Your gun safety training is showing again.

 

checking process,Treat All Guns as Though They are Loaded. ...

https://www.nssf.org/articles/4-primary-rules-of-firearm-safety/

[Robert Paulson]

There was an actor on a tv show when I was a kid and he blew his brains out with a prop gun. It wasn’t a real bullet but some sort of explosive round. You’d think these people would get the memo and it would never happen again

[EVENKEEL]

13 minutes ago, transam said:

Gawd, that is what the safety lady is paid for, the lady messed up..........🙄

I could make you up a dummy round that looks exactly like a live one, you only know it is live using it in a gun ...

It's not just what the bullet looks like but how it sounds when shaken. For sure the safety lady messed up.

[Robert Paulson]

My take on this is I obviously have not seen video or anything but I honestly feel I could not even point a gun in someone direction and pull the trigger no matter how many times I checked whether it was a dummy round or live round. I mean how do you ever point it at someone direction and pull the trigger? 

[klauskunkel]

2 hours ago, CanadaSam said:

In no way is he responsible, in much the same way as if a car is stolen and kills some people, the owner of the car is not responsible in any way.

Your statement does not support your argument:

"the owner of the car is not responsible in any way", correct, the driver is.

"the owner of the gun is not responsible in any way, correct, the shooter is.

[klauskunkel]

1 hour ago, transam said:

Rubbish, it was an actor on a film set where a PAID expert was in attendance to ensure safety.

It takes a while to learn how to be safe with a gun, I know.

The PAID safety was at fault, not an untrained actor...🥴 

Rubbish, when it comes to guns, you do not trust anybody but yourself. Period.

[CanadaSam]

5 minutes ago, klauskunkel said:

Your statement does not support your argument:

"the owner of the car is not responsible in any way", correct, the driver is.

"the owner of the gun is not responsible in any way, correct, the shooter is.

 

Yes, I realized that, but I could think of no other example to signify my point!  Early dementia perhaps!

[Sheryl]

50 minutes ago, transam said:

To destroy something, even our yesterday cowboy films had live rounds to see things being popped, but, the gun safety folk deal with that stuff, the safety lady in question messed up........🤗  

Nobody questions that. And she has been convicted of  involuntary manslaughter.

 

Baldwin has not yet come to trial so we don't know yet what the basis for accusing him is. It might pertain to his role as producer rather than as actor.  The "safety lady" in effect worjed for him and as producer he would have been involved in all sorts of decisions and policies, some if which may be relevant.

 

Presumably this will all be laid out in the trial.

 

 

[save the frogs]

1 hour ago, Sheryl said:

Has anyone explained how and why live bullets even got on the set let alone in the gun?

 

maybe someone evil on that set deliberately wanted someone injured or dead?

[0ffshore360]

28 minutes ago, Robert Paulson said:

My take on this is I obviously have not seen video or anything but I honestly feel I could not even point a gun in someone direction and pull the trigger no matter how many times I checked whether it was a dummy round or live round. I mean how do you ever point it at someone direction and pull the trigger? 

I understand your comment. As a core rule of gun safety it is a rule to never point a gun in the direction of a person.

On a movie set or location there could be reasonable expectation that a "prop" gun is exactly that and live lethal ammunition is absent  so that under  direction  to aim and point  a "fake " weapon would imply no risk.

Sadly there was a fatal lapse in safety protocols and I assume that Baldwin is liable as a part of  responsible management process. Involuntary manslaughter is therefore an accurate assessment.

To what degree of liability is the more important factor.

The nauseous teen who went hunting protestors and was acquitted should be a point of relevence !

 

[Luuk Chaai]

12 hours ago, CanadaSam said:

He's filming a movie, there happens to be a person specifically in charge of weapons, whose sole duty is to ensure the weapons are safe to discharge (blanks).

 

So when he shoots it, he, and everybody else on set is absolutely sure it is safe to do so, there is no doubt about that, in anybody's minds!

 

In no way is he responsible, in much the same way as if a car is stolen and kills some people, the owner of the car is not responsible in any way.

 

actually ..   when someone attempts to hand you a weapon ..   you are to assume it is loaded and should never take hold until it is opened and presented as safe ..... period

[transam]

13 hours ago, klauskunkel said:

Rubbish, when it comes to guns, you do not trust anybody but yourself. Period.

Next you will be saying ALL actors must do 6 months military training..........😂

[Yellowtail]

While there is an armorer, I believe the official protocol calls for everyone that touched the weapon, including the actors, to check the weapon, so I think Baldwin has at least some liability. That a tire specialist is in charge of checking the tires on an airliner does not excuse the pilot from their responsibility to check the tires as well. 

 

It is not that difficult to tell blanks from live rounds. 

 

Was Baldwin not also claiming (at least for a while) that he did not even pull the trigger, and that it just went off? 

 

A young woman is dead, her loved ones deserve to know what happened. 

 

 

[CanadaSam]

5 minutes ago, Yellowtail said:

I believe the official protocol calls for everyone that touched the weapon, including the actors, to check the weapon

 

Do you have any links to this "official protocol"?

[Rimmer]

15 hours ago, Sheryl said:

Has anyone explained how and why live bullets even got on the set let alone in the gun?

 

They were out the back plinking at bottles and the live rounds got mixed in with dummy ones I think she is way guilty for allowing this to happen.

 

They were rehearsing a scene but regardless you never point a gun at anyone unless you want to kill them.

 

I have owned and fired hundreds of rounds through a Colt 45 also fired black powder in my repro Colt.36 Navy (Rainham Range Essex) they are both single action and don't go off on their own unless the hammer is cocked and the trigger is then pulled.

 

I also owned and fired a 9mm DWM 9" artillery long barrel Luger but that is a another story and way different from a Colt.....