Halyna Hutchins Shot With Prop Gun - Alec Baldwin indicted & Hannah Gutierrez-Reed charged, 2021 #8

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

New Posts

I don’t plan to see the film. It seems ‘plot-lite’ to me, so this decision has everything to do with spending hard-earned $$ on a mediocre movie and nothing to do with the death of HH and the controversial trials.
 
Smelly Squirrel said:
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
Click to expand...
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!

The only way it could have ended up in AB's gun, IMO, which would lead to him and HGR being blameless would be if someone had put it in there after he had taken possession of it and I cannot see how that could possibly happen.

If someone had done something to it after HGR handed it to Dave Halls then maybe that breaks the chain of causation making her blameless? If that was the case then AB still failed to check it.

If we go with the facts as to why AB's case was dismissed then, agreed it doesn't exonerate him or HGR necessarily, but there certainly seems to be extreme bad faith on behalf of the prosecution and he wasn't able to mount a defence based on ALL the facts available.

In all honesty, I don't see how this cannot apply to HGR's case as well. The prosecution may not have actually taken possession of it until just after her trial but it seems clear that they knew of its existence well before her trial even started but did nothing to get hold of it!

My thoughts are that she is getting her conviction squashed over this.

Edit: just to add, I don't think that all of the lawyers are full of BS. Erlinda Johnson seems to be completely beyond reproach here. Some genuine ethics and belief in justice in her, I think. I don't believe for a second that she had anything to do with this and she had the good grace to walk at the first sign of impropriety.
 
Betty P said:
www.rollingstone.com

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 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.
Click to expand...
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."
 
Smelly Squirrel said:
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.
Click to expand...

Well
I will certainly SKIP this particular premiere :oops:
 
Betty P said:
www.rollingstone.com

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 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.
Click to expand...

This is gross imo. The dismissal didn't exonerate him, he should be grateful there was the misconduct, which allowed him to walk away not due to the merits of the case. He should just keep walking far way from it.
 

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.
 
Last edited:
Dotta said:
Well
I will certainly SKIP this particular premiere :oops:
Click to expand...

Probably go straight to a streaming service....I can picture people watching it this way but I do not see crowds flocking to theaters spending $$$$ to see Alec Baldwin up on a big screen.
 
The judge did say in her dismissal order that post-trial discovery of evidence under Brady requires a reasonable probability that the result of the proceeding would have been different. So, it's not just proving a violation, have to prove it would have changed the outcome.
 
Smelly Squirrel said:
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.
Click to expand...
All the publicity surrounding this movie quite likely will improve the box office.

I personally couldn’t watch the helicopter scene in Twilight Zone knowing that two young children and Vic Morrow had been killed during production.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Staff online

Members online

... and 203 more.
Total: 2,165 (members: 204, guests: 1,961)

Online statistics

Members online
204
Guests online
1,961
Total visitors
2,165
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
599,998
Messages
18,102,464
Members
230,962
Latest member
EmmaJean
Back
Top