Dotta
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jan 23, 2021
- Messages
- 11,625
- Reaction score
- 71,222
I agree here. It's completely irrelevant where the ammo came from - the entire point of why we check firearms is because there MIGHT be live rounds present. Live rounds exist in the world and they very often get places they shouldn't be!All the lawyers in this case are so full of bs. That evidence couldn't exculpate HGR. Wherever the live round came from, she was still responsible for whether it ended up in any of the guns on the set. The same goes for AB's part in it. He just got lucky the prosecutor screwed up. (Not saying AB was guilty, but it wouldn't affect him either way.)
And I highly suspect Spiro knew before the trial started that he would be bringing this up, he was just waiting for the right witness to spring it. It's still the prosecutor's responsibility, but it is quite shady on his part. moo
This is often being reported as Baldwin is going to sue the prosecutor. I think that is very unlikely. However, he may be preparing to sue Santa Fe County. But I do also wonder if this could be an attempt to use this as leverage to get the State of New Mexico to reconsider the denial of the tax incentives for "Rust."![]()
Alec Baldwin Plans to Sue Santa Fe Prosecutor, Sheriff After 'Rust' Charge Dismissal
Alec Baldwin’s lawyers have warned the Santa Fe sheriff and prosecutors of "future litigation" over their actions in the 'Rust' shooting trial.www.rollingstone.com
Baldwin’s attorneys have sent preservation notices to the Santa Fe prosecutors and sheriff’s offices asking them to preserve all evidence relating to his trial.
The movie has such a dark cloud over it, seems like it wouldn't do well, but who knows? Lots of people did go see The Crow and Twilight Zone. But then those didn't have the star of the movie being a real life killer during the movie.
![]()
Alec Baldwin Plans to Sue Santa Fe Prosecutor, Sheriff After 'Rust' Charge Dismissal
Alec Baldwin’s lawyers have warned the Santa Fe sheriff and prosecutors of "future litigation" over their actions in the 'Rust' shooting trial.www.rollingstone.com
Baldwin’s attorneys have sent preservation notices to the Santa Fe prosecutors and sheriff’s offices asking them to preserve all evidence relating to his trial.
Well
I will certainly SKIP this particular premiere![]()
All the publicity surrounding this movie quite likely will improve the box office.The movie has such a dark cloud over it, seems like it wouldn't do well, but who knows? Lots of people did go see The Crow and Twilight Zone. But then those didn't have the star of the movie being a real life killer during the movie.
RSBMThat evidence couldn't exculpate HGR. Wherever the live round came from, she was still responsible for whether it ended up in any of the guns on the set. The same goes for AB's part in it.
And I highly suspect Spiro knew before the trial started that he would be bringing this up, he was just waiting for the right witness to spring it. It's still the prosecutor's responsibility, but it is quite shady on his part. moo
In Tuesday’s filing, Gutierrez Reed’s attorneys argue that her case should be thrown out or retried in part because of the judge’s determination of withheld evidence in Baldwin’s case; what they assert was Morrissey lying in court about the evidence on Friday; and what they say were other instances of suppressed evidence in the armorer’s case.
In a statement Wednesday to CNN, Morrissey said she would respond “in writing” to the defense motions.
“I have always been the subject of personal attacks from Mr. Bowles (Gutierrez Reed’s attorney) and Mr. Baldwin’s legal team, so nothing new there,” Morrissey said.
Yes, the defense is taking shots at the prosecution because the prosecution didn't do their job properly. That's what a defense lawyer is supposed to be doing, as Morrissey should well know. In all the filings I read and the trial testimony I watched, absolutely none of it was personal attacks. IMO, this chip on Morrissey's shoulder is a large part of what got her into trouble in the first place.
Edit - Here's the motion from Bowles.
Lots of interesting information in the filing. I think HGR may have a decent shot at a new trial or even an outright dismissal. Not necessarily because of the ammo by itself, but because of other evidence that the prosecution knew about but didn't come to light until after the trial. That includes the supplements to the Haag report as well as interviews with Seth Kenney and Brian Carpenter that were potentially exculpatory.
The thing is that if you choose to use real firearms you should not "assume" that there is never going to be ammunition around. This is why there are various checks and methods of handling them in order to mitigate the risks. If you assume that live ammo is never going to be an issue then that is absolutely 100%, guaranteed to result in an accident at some point. That's just how probability works.RSBM
IIRC, there were not supposed to be any live rounds on this set - only blanks and dummies. HGR and AB were operating from this assumption in assessing risks. There is no evidence AB or HGR authorized, requested, received, or used any live rounds on this set before the shooting.
At this point, I don't know:
Who brought the live rounds to the set,
for what purpose
and at whose request (if any); and
Who handled the live rounds immediately after they arrived,
what s/he did with them, whether HGR became aware of the presence of live rounds on the set
and how they came to be in the gun that killed Halyna.
For me, that's too many unanswered questions to support a prosecution based on gross negligence.
My personal standard for handling firearms is identical to yours. I am extremely careful what I do with them. But respectfully - I am a shooter of targets and wild game, not an actor rehearsing a role in a movie.The thing is that if you choose to use real firearms you should not "assume" that there is never going to be ammunition around. This is why there are various checks and methods of handling them in order to mitigate the risks. If you assume that live ammo is never going to be an issue then that is absolutely 100%, guaranteed to result in an accident at some point. That's just how probability works.
How the live rounds got to the set, why, who handled them, etc, etc are fairly irrelevant points to consider, to be honest. HGR almost certainly loaded that live round and Alec Baldwin was holding the gun when it discharged. Of the two, only the latter we know as a certain fact.
As to the evidence as to how they got to the set; on the balance of probabilities, it would seem that they got there via HGR unknowingly introducing them as remnants of the ammo that her dad was using to instruct actors for a previous film. That's just my opinion but I'm not seeing any other reasonable explanation.
As to supporting a negligence prosecution, that is your opinion but I respectfully disagree. Live rounds exist in the world so it is not unreasonable to expect that sooner or later they will show up where they aren't supposed to be. That is simply common sense which means that it's common sense to properly check for them.
As someone who knows about firearms and who has experience of this type of firearm, ammo and dummy rounds over many years. I can tell you that were I working in an environment where I knew dummy rounds would be present I'd be incredibly anal about checking guns, rounds, etc. Incredibly! Dummy rounds, IMO, are extremely dangerous things - their entire purpose is to fool you into thinking they are live rounds. That carries big risks with it. Simply assuming that they pose no danger is the very definition of negligent.
As I've said many times on this thread - if you aren't prepared to bear the consequences of what might go wrong when using firearms then don't use firearms. Especially in a professional capacity!
All MOO, obvs.
Too bad he cant just let it go
The document referred to in the article is probably a "notice of claim" - a procedural prerequisite to filing suit against a public entity or public employee in New Mexico. It was probably accompanied by a "demand to preserve evidence" - a procedural step that enhances the consequences for those named in the notice in the event evidence within the scope of the demand is destroyed or lost.Too bad he cant just let it go