Armorers prepare dummy rounds in different ways. Some remove the primer entirely, the safest way. Some, however only dent the rim of the cartridge near the primer. There is no standardization.
Jeopardy attached when the jury panel was sworn. Unless this judge is reversed on appeal, double jeopardy considerations would prevent a second trial regardless of the "with prejudice" designation. It's telling one of the prosecutors on the case resigned earlier today. Alec Baldwin Cries as Judge Dismisses 'Rust' Case in Shocking Twist
The trigger still has to be pulled. Baldwin says he didn't pull the trigger so fanning the hammer of the revolver would not work. It would just cock the hammer back until the trigger was pulled.
Well, tonight Baldwin may be firing a gun in the air in celebration. (But without pulling the trigger.)
Im reminded of post #185, where the lead investigator for the prosecution had this to say about the case file delivered by the local sheriff …. Sounds like their shitty police work caught up with them today. Shilling wrote, “Knowing full well the probability that this email may be subject to IPRA (Inspection of Public Records Act), I am compelled to respectfully offer the following.” “The conduct of the Santa Fe County Sheriff’s Office during and after their initial investigation is reprehensible and unprofessional to a degree I still have no words for,” he said in the email dated June 20. “Not I or 200 more proficient investigators than I can/could clean up the mess delivered to your office in October 2022 (1 year since the initial incident…inexcusable).”
That’s pretty bad, a friend of the Armorer’s father met with police and handed over additional live ammo that he thought was connected to the rust set — the police, at the request of the prosecutor, filed the evidence under an unrelated case number, thereby hiding it from the defense. The judge clearly made the right call, here.
Curious - is this a way for the prosecution to get out of prosecuting? Or, are they simply this incompetent?
It's a way they pay favoritism to the Dems of Hollywood that kill... The least they could have done is go through with the court case even if the judge has to go against the jury. You point a gun, prop or not, and you willingly pull the trigger and someone dies becasue of it? You caused that death... simple as that.
I mentioned in an earlier thread on this that in a previous job I was forced to spend time around Baldwin. He is an A1 entitled jerk. And I am being nice. But I feel for him in this case. A terrible tragedy. And people making it political? Good lord people.
Yep, knew all I needed to about his personality when the recording of him chewing out his daughter went live. I like this outcome, but believe a civil case is more viable.
Agreed and the civil cases involving Baldwin were resolved months ago. @Gatorrick22 's post 251 is utter nonsense. No prosecutor is going to intentionally engage in prosecutorial misconduct to make a case go away at the risk of their job and, potentially, entire career. There are a myriad of ways to make a case go away...standing silent on a motion to dismiss or suppress immediately comes to mind.
There was a lot of stupid to go around from what I read on that set. I don’t think what Baldwin did was criminal. The whole court case was bizarre from start to finish.
I thought some sort of negligence charge was appropriate, because it was basically a nepotism hire. Baldwins’s responsibility there was as the producer. It obviously was an odd scenario in that he was ALSO the actor who had the gun in hand when it killed somebody. But the way I looked at it: It could have been any other actor on set with the prop gun in hand who had the gun go off, that actor would not likely be held accountable. But Baldwin would still have the responsibility of hiring the incompetent armorer. Unfortunately the prosecutor went down the path that was never going to fly, even without their misconduct.
She was already convicted and sentenced to 18 months -- and appears to be a horrible person -- but has already moved to have her conviction overturned by the same legal reasoning used here ... I'd have to think she has a pretty good argument.
I think she's more likely just to be granted a new trial unless the evidence in dispute is no longer available. Please keep in mind that while they were both charged for the same incident, their theories of prosecution and defense varied significantly.
