Halyna Hutchins Shot With Prop Gun - Alec Baldwin indicted & Hannah Gutierrez-Reed charged, 2021 #6

[Ruby12345]

“Over the last few days and in preparation for the May 3, 2023, preliminary hearing, new facts were revealed that demand further investigation and forensic analysis in the case against Alexander “Alec” Rae Baldwin, III. Consequently, we cannot proceed under the current time constraints and on the facts and evidence turned over by law enforcement in its existing form. We therefore will be dismissing the involuntary manslaughter charges against Mr. Baldwin to conduct further investigation. This decision does not absolve Mr. Baldwin of criminal culpability and charges may be refiled. Our follow-up investigation will remain active and on-going.”

From the deadline article. I wonder what the new facts are.

 

[steeltowngirl]

UPDATED with special prosecutor statement after PREVIOUS EXCLUSIVE: Despite a heady day of news about special prosecutors in New Mexico planning to drop criminal charges against Alec Baldwin for his role in the shooting death of cinematographer Halyna Hutchins on the set of Rustin 2021, the actor and producer may still face charges.

The special prosecutors, Kari Morrissey and Jason Lewis, released a statement late Thursday regarding the decision to drop his charges, saying they may be refiled after “further investigation.”
….
Despite reports earlier in the day that former Rust armorer Hannah Gutierrez-Reed would also see her charges dropped, her status has not changed. “Charges against Hannah Gutierrez-Reed remain unchanged,” the prosecutors said tonight.

Alec Baldwin Not Absolved In Fatal ‘Rust’ Shooting Despite Planned Dropping Of Charges, Prosecutors Say – Update

Criminal charges will be dropped against Alec Baldwin and armorer Hannah Gutierrez-Reed in the fatal shooting of Rust cinematographer Halyna Hutchins.

deadline.com

 

[DI_Isokawa]

As was likely from the beginning, the weapon was an issue.

'Rust' prosecutors drop charges against Alec Baldwin after questions over gun misfire

New Mexico prosecutors have dropped criminal charges against Alec Baldwin in the fatal 'Rust' shooting, two people familiar with the matter say.

www.latimes.com

 

[PrairieWind]

Wow, never thought of that. That David Halls may regret taking a plea - not sticking with his "not guilty" plea.

You had mentioned some time ago that you thought charges would be dropped and I was going to ask you why. Well, you were right!!!!

There were one set of prosecutors filing this detailed indictment going on and on about guilt, then newly appointed special prosecutors doing the opposite and dropping charges.

What did these new prosecutors see that the first ones didn't?

And how does this affect HGR?

These are the 2 big questions.

I had thought that manslaughter charges against AB were not warranted because I didn't think his actions met the elements. Even manslaughter requires an element of intent that didn't exist here. All crimes have an element of intent. AB should have been able to rely on the armorer and director that the gun was not loaded. That in my opinion from a legal standpoint, eliminates any criminal intent. Is he civilly liable? Sure. Could he have been guilty of some other lesser criminal charge? Perhaps. But, to me, this looked like a DA that wanted to appear tough and let that cloud her judgment. Then, in hiring the first special prosecutor, they were talking in an echo chamber, reaffirming each other, seeing what they wanted.

I have seen an article this morning that says there is now some question about the gun and the FBI report about it not being able to fire without the trigger pulled. Something about the hammer being replaced. Not sure if this is accurate or not. If it is, how does this happen? Was the hammer original to the gun or not? Does the FBI report mention this? Regardless, this would seem to affect the charges against AB, but not so much against HGR: she still loaded a live round into that gun. But her charges are also being dropped. This tells me the prosecution just wants to be done with this whole mess.

ETA: I just now saw that charges against HGR are NOT being dropped. We should probably just give this all a few days to shake out and see what really happens here. I think often media gets in a hurry to report breaking news and gets sloppy with facts.

 

[deugirtni]

I had thought that manslaughter charges against AB were not warranted because I didn't think his actions met the elements. Even manslaughter requires an element of intent that didn't exist here. All crimes have an element of intent. AB should have been able to rely on the armorer and director that the gun was not loaded. That in my opinion from a legal standpoint, eliminates any criminal intent. Is he civilly liable? Sure. Could he have been guilty of some other lesser criminal charge? Perhaps. But, to me, this looked like a DA that wanted to appear tough and let that cloud her judgment. Then, in hiring the first special prosecutor, they were talking in an echo chamber, reaffirming each other, seeing what they wanted.

I have seen an article this morning that says there is now some question about the gun and the FBI report about it not being able to fire without the trigger pulled. Something about the hammer being replaced. Not sure if this is accurate or not. If it is, how does this happen? Was the hammer original to the gun or not? Does the FBI report mention this? Regardless, this would seem to affect the charges against AB, but not so much against HGR: she still loaded a live round into that gun. But her charges are also being dropped. This tells me the prosecution just wants to be done with this whole mess.

ETA: I just now saw that charges against HGR are NOT being dropped. We should probably just give this all a few days to shake out and see what really happens here. I think often media gets in a hurry to report breaking news and gets sloppy with facts.

My guess is that originally Altwies received reports, had them, but either failed to actually read them or comprehend them (similar to how she showed she was also seemingly unable to comprehend what the law stated in a few intances?), and the new 'special prosecutors' actually read through (and comprehended) the reports, and knew further research was necessary before that charge could be laid in AB's case. jmguess.

 

[10ofRods]

With his unsupervised probation?

Yeah, he can claim he was railroaded.

imho we've sufficiently worked out the on-set dynamics perhaps.

jmho ymmv lrr

Since Hannah has not pleaded out (the pressure on her to do so must be tremendous), we may see Dave and Alec at her trial.

But, I will be surprised if there's actually a trial and not a plea bargain. The documentary that AB agreed to in his settlement with MH is now being micromanaged by Alec himself.

As ‘Rust’ Resumes Filming in Montana, Alec Baldwin Is Working With Rory Kennedy on a Documentary

“Rust” resumed filming Thursday at the Yellowstone ranch in Montana, a year and a half after Alec Baldwin accidentally shot and killed cinematographer Halyna Hutchins. Director Joel Sou…

variety.com

So, basically another puff piece, IMO. It's sad. I thought it would be about Halyna.

IMO, it's sad.

 

[10ofRods]

I had thought that manslaughter charges against AB were not warranted because I didn't think his actions met the elements. Even manslaughter requires an element of intent that didn't exist here. All crimes have an element of intent. AB should have been able to rely on the armorer and director that the gun was not loaded. That in my opinion from a legal standpoint, eliminates any criminal intent. Is he civilly liable? Sure. Could he have been guilty of some other lesser criminal charge? Perhaps. But, to me, this looked like a DA that wanted to appear tough and let that cloud her judgment. Then, in hiring the first special prosecutor, they were talking in an echo chamber, reaffirming each other, seeing what they wanted.

I have seen an article this morning that says there is now some question about the gun and the FBI report about it not being able to fire without the trigger pulled. Something about the hammer being replaced. Not sure if this is accurate or not. If it is, how does this happen? Was the hammer original to the gun or not? Does the FBI report mention this? Regardless, this would seem to affect the charges against AB, but not so much against HGR: she still loaded a live round into that gun. But her charges are also being dropped. This tells me the prosecution just wants to be done with this whole mess.

ETA: I just now saw that charges against HGR are NOT being dropped. We should probably just give this all a few days to shake out and see what really happens here. I think often media gets in a hurry to report breaking news and gets sloppy with facts.

No intent required in the NM statute. An otherwise legal action can be deemed involuntary manslaughter in NM, if the person showed lack of caution or circumspection.

Instead of intent, it requires lack of caution or circumspection. The case law seems to support this.

New Mexico Involuntary Manslaughter Law - FindLaw.com

In New Mexico, manslaughter is the unlawful killing of a human being without malice. In contrast, murder is the killing of another human being through a willful, deliberate, and premeditated act. The crime of manslaughter is divided between voluntary manslaughter and involuntary manslaughter.

www.findlaw.com

...Involuntary manslaughter consists of manslaughter committed in the commission of an unlawful act not amounting to felony, or in the commission of a lawful act which might produce death in an unlawful manner or without due caution and circumspection.

So even if a person intended to and was acting lawfully, if they fail to exercise due caution or circumspection, they can be charged. A person cleaning their gun in a home in NM is performing a lawful act. If they fail to be cautious and clear the gun and a bullet shoots someone out on the sidewalk, it's involuntary manslaughter. That was one of the more common kinds of involuntary manslaughter I observed when I lived there.

One person was arrested two streets over from where I lived. He went on vacation and asked two neighbor children to feed his cat, giving them access to his garage. He forgot he had a loaded gun stored there. One child died. He was arrested.

There were also some unsafe swimming pool cases.

IMO.

 

[10ofRods]

y“Over the last few days and in preparation for the May 3, 2023, preliminary hearing, new facts were revealed that demand further investigation and forensic analysis in the case against Alexander “Alec” Rae Baldwin, III. Consequently, we cannot proceed under the current time constraints and on the facts and evidence turned over by law enforcement in its existing form. We therefore will be dismissing the involuntary manslaughter charges against Mr. Baldwin to conduct further investigation. This decision does not absolve Mr. Baldwin of criminal culpability and charges may be refiled. Our follow-up investigation will remain active and on-going.”

From the deadline article. I wonder what the new facts are.

Personally, I think they ran into a real roadblock when the "new fact" that the FBI destroyed the original gun emerged.

Apparently, in order to restore the gun to working condition, they had to replace parts of it (so no longer the original gun). Defense has been claiming that they can't independently test the gun and therefore it can't be in evidence. The replacement of the hammer is the new part of this story, IMO. The FBI's goal was to show that the gun couldn't fire without the trigger being pulled - which they established.

But I believe the defense likely has the right to have their own experts look at the gun - which is no longer the same gun that Alec used. The manufacturer installed a certain type of hammer, now there's a different one. (That's what the defense will claim, IMO).

The links about this are buried in my Google searches under all the recent Baldwin news, so this is IMO (and when things die down and I have time, I'll try to find the story about the damaged gun).

JMO.

 

[ch_13]

Apparently, in order to restore the gun to working condition, they had to replace parts of it (so no longer the original gun). Defense has been claiming that they can't independently test the gun and therefore it can't be in evidence. The replacement of the hammer is the new part of this story, IMO. The FBI's goal was to show that the gun couldn't fire without the trigger being pulled - which they established.

But I believe the defense likely has the right to have their own experts look at the gun - which is no longer the same gun that Alec used. The manufacturer installed a certain type of hammer, now there's a different one. (That's what the defense will claim, IMO).

If the LA Times article linked above is correct, the gun was modified before the shooting occurred. That was the new piece of information that prosecutors received which made them drop the charges.

From the article:

The development came after prosecutors received new information in the case — that Baldwin’s prop gun had been modified before being delivered to the low-budget western in October 2021, according to three people familiar with the matter who were not authorized to
comment.

The replica of the vintage weapon — a Colt .45 revolver — had been modified , increasing the odds that the gun might have misfired, as Baldwin has said, according to the sources.

 

[Betty P]

If the LA Times article linked above is correct, the gun was modified before the shooting occurred. That was the new piece of information that prosecutors received which made them drop the charges.

From the article:

Who modified it and why? Why would anyone want a hair-trigger on a theatrical gun? That serves no useful purpose in filming a movie.

Since the armorer (HGR) is usually responsible for providing the theatrical/prop guns for the movie they're contracted to do, it seems a safe bet that she was the one who brought the modified gun to the set. JMO. It will be interesting to see what develops regarding her case. JMO, she made a mess of the job, got someone killed and tried to blame it on everyone else.

 

[ch_13]

Who modified it and why? Why would anyone want a hair-trigger on a theatrical gun? That serves no useful purpose in filming a movie.

Since the armorer (HGR) is usually responsible for providing the theatrical/prop guns for the movie they're contracted to do, it seems a safe bet that she was the one who brought the modified gun to the set. JMO. It will be interesting to see what develops regarding her case. JMO, she made a mess of the job, got someone killed and tried to blame it on everyone else.

I don't think there's any indication that a 'hair-trigger' was installed on the gun. And I think it's unlikely that Hannah Gutierrez-Reed modified it. By all account she was scrambling to handle the basics of the jobs she was given and was being rushed by production. I doubt she had time to go messing about with firearm internals. Furthermore, this gun was rented from a props house. Why would anyone on the Rust set want to modify it? It would be like putting new rims on a car you rented from Hertz.

This was a replica of a 19th century Colt .45 that was being rented out by an Albuquerque props house. Considering the number of westerns that get filmed in that part of the country, I would imagine that gun has been in many film and tv productions over the years. At some point it probably broke and was repaired. Nothing more conspiratorial than that.

However, the fact that the gun is no longer stock does open up a lot of questions: Where were the replacement parts sourced? When was the repair done and by whom? Could the modifications have made a misfire more likely? Without knowing the answers to those questions the case against Baldwin becomes untenable.

 

[Betty P]

I don't think there's any indication that a 'hair-trigger' was installed on the gun. And I think it's unlikely that Hannah Gutierrez-Reed was modifying it. By all account she was scrambling to handle the basics of the jobs she was given and was being rushed by production. I doubt she had time to go messing about with firearm internals. Furthermore, this gun was rented from a props house. Why would anyone on the Rust set want to modify it? It would be like putting new rims on a car you rented from Hertz.

This was a replica of a 19th century Colt .45 that was being rented out by an Albuquerque props house. Considering the number of westerns that get filmed in that part of the country, I would imagine that gun has been in many film and tv productions over the years. At some point it probably broke and was repaired. Nothing more conspiratorial than that.

However, the fact that the gun is no longer stock it does open up a lot of questions: Where were the replacement parts sourced? When was the repair done and by whom? Could the modifications have made a misfire more likely? Without knowing the answers to those questions the case against Baldwin becomes untenable.

Thanks for the correction on the local prop house being the supplier of the prop gun. If you look at the links above, one of the reasons the charges against AB were dropped was due to further testing showed the gun could have gone off without pulling the trigger. Further news indicating the gun was modified before the shooting occurred, leading one to assume that the modification was to make the gun so easy to fire that it could do so without pulling the trigger.

I'm just putting this news together:

Charges were dropped against AB after testing and investigation showed the gun could fire w/o pulling the trigger

The gun had been modified before the shooting occurred

I assume the charges were dropped because the further testing and investigation showed someone else had modified the prop gun to make it easier to fire (hair trigger).

That means either

• the prop house provided the wrong kind of prop gun (one that had been modified inappropriately) without telling the movie production company and armorer, or
• someone else on the movie set modified the gun, then allowed it to be given to AB to use with both live rounds and a modified trigger

JMO

 

[ch_13]

If you look at the links above, one of the reasons the charges against AB were dropped was due to further testing showed the gun could have gone off without pulling the trigger. Further news indicating the gun was modified before the shooting occurred, leading one to assume that the modification was to make the gun so easy to fire that it could do so without pulling the trigger.

Do you have the link you're referring to? Because from what I know the opposite is true. Testing by the FBI last summer determined that the gun could not have been fired without pulling the trigger. (link)

Then in March, it came out that the gun was damaged during the FBI's testing and AB's lawyers claimed that would affect their ability to examine the gun. (link)

Finally, this week AB's charges were dropped and sources claim that's due to the gun being modified. However, it's not clear exactly how and why the modification occurred. (link)

I know all this back and forth about the gun is confusing, but as far as I know the only testing done to date is by the FBI crime lab and they have never said that the gun could go off without pulling the trigger.

 

[mickey2942]

I really wondered about the possibility of problems with the gun being damaged during tests.

Hopefully HG gets a deal.

 

[IceIce9]

Do you have the link you're referring to? Because from what I know the opposite is true. Testing by the FBI last summer determined that the gun could not have been fired without pulling the trigger. (link)

Then in March, it came out that the gun was damaged during the FBI's testing and AB's lawyers claimed that would affect their ability to examine the gun. (link)

Finally, this week AB's charges were dropped and sources claim that's due to the gun being modified. However, it's not clear exactly how and why the modification occurred. (link)

I know all this back and forth about the gun is confusing, but as far as I know the only testing done to date is by the FBI crime lab and they have never said that the gun could go off without pulling the trigger.

This is from an article I read:

The source said that the modifications to the gun used in the 2021 shooting on the set of “Rust” included the potential ability for the gun to discharge a bullet without the trigger being pulled – a claim which has been asserted by Baldwin, who referenced it in an interview with CNN last August.

Potential modifications to the firing mechanism of the gun prompted dismissal of charges against Baldwin, source tells CNN | CNN

New information is coming to light as to what led prosecutors to dismiss involuntary manslaughter charges against actor Alec Baldwin.

edition.cnn.com

 

[ch_13]

This is from an article I read:

The source said that the modifications to the gun used in the 2021 shooting on the set of “Rust” included the potential ability for the gun to discharge a bullet without the trigger being pulled – a claim which has been asserted by Baldwin, who referenced it in an interview with CNN last August.

Potential modifications to the firing mechanism of the gun prompted dismissal of charges against Baldwin, source tells CNN | CNN

New information is coming to light as to what led prosecutors to dismiss involuntary manslaughter charges against actor Alec Baldwin.

edition.cnn.com

Interesting. I didn't see that before.

Of course it's hard to take unnamed sources at face value. However, if that's true (and it's a big if) then what the hell was the FBI testing?

 

[SteveS]

Charges were dropped against AB after testing and investigation showed the gun could fire w/o pulling the trigger

....

I assume the charges were dropped because the further testing and investigation showed someone else had modified the prop gun to make it easier to fire (hair trigger).

The article doesn't necessarily have as much substance as it wants to make us think.

It does say there were modifications, but it has no idea what they were. How about the firing mechanism and how it may have worked? Only asserts a "possibility of modifications" to that part of the gun. That means there's also a possibility of no relevant modifications whatsoever.

It does not assert there was any testing that showed the gun firing without the trigger being pulled. It just spoke of a "potential ability" to get the gun to fire without it -- ie, it's theorized by someone (the defense, say?) at this point, and not tested or proven possible at all.

Other key words that raise questions were "a source familiar to the case" (which is not as helpful as it looks, since it could have been someone on AB's team, with obvious bias attached). Whose pov or angle a source has makes a huge difference. It sounds to me like the defense's talking points, ie we have one of their team speaking anonymously through the media.

I see this as part of AB's team's PR game, trying to put lipstick on that pig where he shot and killed someone. But I don't think this case will be resurrected, unless they find something new and significant.

 

[IceIce9]

The article doesn't necessarily have as much substance as it wants to make us think.

It does say there were modifications, but it has no idea what they were. How about the firing mechanism and how it may have worked? Only asserts a "possibility of modifications" to that part of the gun. That means there's also a possibility of no relevant modifications whatsoever.

It does not assert there was any testing that showed the gun firing without the trigger being pulled. It just spoke of a "potential ability" to get the gun to fire without it -- ie, it's theorized by someone (the defense, say?) at this point, and not tested or proven possible at all.

Other key words that raise questions were "a source familiar to the case" (which is not as helpful as it looks, since it could have been someone on AB's team, with obvious bias attached). Whose pov or angle a source has makes a huge difference. It sounds to me like the defense's talking points, ie we have one of their team speaking anonymously through the media.

I see this as part of AB's team's PR game, trying to put lipstick on that pig where he shot and killed someone. But I don't think this case will be resurrected, unless they find something new and significant.

From another article:

Alec Baldwin continues to embarrass Santa Fe New Mexico authorities who charged him with involuntary manslaughter ... because he may have been right all along when he insisted he never pulled the trigger on the gun that killed cinematographer Halyna Hutchins.

The prop gun Baldwin used back in 2021 had been modified, this according to the L.A. Times ... the trigger mechanism had been changed which increased the probability it could have misfired without Baldwin pulling the trigger.

Alec Baldwin's Gun In 'Rust' Shooting Had Modified Trigger

Alec Baldwin continues to embarrass Santa Fe New Mexico authorities who charged him with involuntary manslaughter ... because he may have been right all along when he insisted he never pulled the trigger.

amp.tmz.com

 

[Laughing]

Re: modification of pistols

This is a replica Colt, right? Maybe a replica Colt Navy, for the time period?

Fairly often, pistol grips are changed. This could be considered a modification. If the previous movie wanted/called for a pearl-handled revolver, the grips may have been changed. If the revolver arrived with pearl, wood/wood look may have been swapped.

Imitation pearl grip from eBay:


If the person handling the revolver in a previous movie had small hands, the grips may have been switched for smaller/thinner grips.

One might have 'winter grips' to set up for outdoor range use wearing gloves. Sometimes actors in Westerns wear gloves. The gloves take up space, and the pistol may be more comfortable with different grips.

Texture, material, appearance are all factors in grip selection.

So -- do we know that this "modifcation" was to the firing mechanism???

jmho ymmv lrr

 

[SteveS]

Re: modification of pistols

This is a replica Colt, right? Maybe a replica Colt Navy, for the time period?

Fairly often, pistol grips are changed. This could be considered a modification. If the previous movie wanted/called for a pearl-handled revolver, the grips may have been changed. If the revolver arrived with pearl, wood/wood look may have been swapped.

Imitation pearl grip from eBay:
View attachment 416595

If the person handling the revolver in a previous movie had small hands, the grips may have been switched for smaller/thinner grips.

One might have 'winter grips' to set up for outdoor range use wearing gloves. Sometimes actors in Westerns wear gloves. The gloves take up space, and the pistol may be more comfortable with different grips.

Texture, material, appearance are all factors in grip selection.

So -- do we know that this "modifcation" was to the firing mechanism???

jmho ymmv lrr

"So -- do we know that this "modification" was to the firing mechanism???"

No we do not. But sloppy reporting (perhaps with the assistance of AB's PR team?) is inserting that idea into the narrative.

The TMZ article quoted in the post above yours said "The prop gun Baldwin used back in 2021 had been modified, this according to the L.A. Times ... the trigger mechanism had been changed which increased the probability it could have misfired without Baldwin pulling the trigger."

Unfortunately that's just more sloppy article writing. When you follow the reference TMZ cites in the LA Times, it says the same thing we've seen everywhere else, which is that the gun "had been modified" without any note of what the changes may have been, followed by speculation that this info is "increasing the odds that the gun might have misfired, as Baldwin has said, according to the sources."

As you note, it could have been to the handle grips, for example.

If something was done to the firing mechanism or trigger, AB has a point, but we're not there yet.

'Rust' prosecutors drop charges against Alec Baldwin after questions over gun misfire

New Mexico prosecutors have dropped criminal charges against Alec Baldwin in the fatal 'Rust' shooting, two people familiar with the matter say.

www.latimes.com