Alec Baldwin fatally shot someone on movie set with gun mishap

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Prosecutors cheating yet again. When will it stop?

Maybe a prosecutor can weigh in here?

Former prosecutor here.

The evidence was irrelevant, but the violation of Brady/Giglio and the New Mexico rules of discovery was egregious so the dismissal is warranted.

I once dismissed my own case with prejudice during trial when evidence came to light which we had not disclosed to defense and which had not even been shared with me by the cops. I was a defense attorney first and I adhered strongly to the constitutional protections of defendants as a prosecutor too.

In my observation and experience, fewer prosecutors are like I was and more are too ambitious for convictions which clouds their judgment. I think some are pretty bad actors.

I watched the whole trial for the armorer and coverage since and I have to say, it is clear to me that Baldwin is haunted by what happened while the armorer, whose fault it really most was, still fails to exhibit any real remorse. Which is probably why she was so callous and reckless as to have live ammo anywhere near a movie set.

And Baldwin settled with the family, right? Did the armorer do that too?

Exactly. He got off because he PAID. Did he also pay the prosecutor?, is what should be asked.

IANAL, but you are clearly not, either. He paid the family. Whether he paid the family has no bearing on his criminal trial. There, the jury and the judge decide. He did not pay the judge nor any member of the jury, so whether he chose to pay compensation to the family of the victim only forestalled a civil liability trial against him. The settlement means that they won't sue him for liability.

The case that was just dismissed was the criminal trial, which is different from the civil trial.

Actually I am a lawyer and your explanation has nothing to do with my comment. I think he (his lawyers) paid off the prosecutor and maybe even the judge in order to get that dismissal. That’s how it works. Good for him. Sure, his lawyers also did the dog and pony work of proving up all the Brady violations, but we do that every day in indigent criminal defense and no one dismisses sh*t. You want a dismissal like Baldwin got? That costs some money. He paid it. I’m glad for him.

Oh jeez. You are not a lawyer and that is not how it works. SMH

Dude. You are not a lawyer. Saying that the judge was paid off without proof is an ethical violation that would get you disbarred. No lawyer would say what you said.

I said I think he paid the prosecutor and maybe the judge. Not unethical to say what you think.

Why don’t you charming mansplainers tell me how come this prosecutor and judge threw this case out then? And why don’t they throw out Brendan Dassey’s or any other poor person’s? Why do those Brady violations go unpunished for DECADES? What did Baldwin have, other than money? I work at Innocence and we prove up Brady and Gigiio all day long and judges and DAs do not throw cases out. How did Baldwin get this done?

It's obvious to normal people that this case should never have been brought. He was acting and not responsible for an actual live round being in the gun. You clearly are a drumpf nut job. The prosecutors and investigators were corrupt. This was a ridiculous case and everyone knows it.

[Anonymous]

You can listen to the prosecutors testimony on YouTube. According to her the ammo in question had never left the state of Arizona and had nothing to do with the set of Rust. The owner of that ammo offered it to the defense and the prosecution as some live ammo from the same batch had been given to Hannah’s father. Hannah’s father has taken that ammo to Texas to another movie set. The ammo Hannah’s father has taken had already been put in evidence in the Rust case. That ammo that has come from Hannah’s father has already been tested and shown to not be the same as the ammo on the Rust set so the prosecutor did not feel they needed the rest of the batch that had never left Arizona or been in the hands of anyone connected to Hannah. The guy sent her a picture and to her it looked the same as the ammo already tested and dissimilar to the ammo on the Rust set.

However the guy who had the ammo in Arizona was on the Hannah witness list and when he came to court he brought the ammo with him. He didn’t end up testifying but he dropped the ammo off at the sheriff’s office. It was tagged but with a different case file than the Rust case as no one related to the Rust case was involved in the ammo being dropped off. Then someone from the sheriff’s office told the prosecutor about the ammo being dropped off but since she has already decided this ammo was irrelevant to the case (as has Hannah’s lawyer) as it has never left Arizona. She didn’t retag it to the Rust case and didn’t tell Baldwin’s team about it.

But then one of Baldwin’s witnesses references this Arizona ammo dropped off at the sheriff’s office…which his own team didn’t know about but the prosecutor did.

At the end of the day that ammo likely had nothing to do with Rust and Baldwin’s team probably would have agreed but the issue here is they didn’t know about it and she did and so it was enough to get the trial dismissed.

[Anonymous]

I think it helps that the Judge didn’t think much of the prosecutions theory to start with. I’m guessing it wasn’t a difficult decision to end it when the opportunity presented itself.