Judge tosses Alec Baldwin manslaughter case over withheld evidence

Said at the time this was a ridiculous case. Prosecutors knew it was weak, so withheld evidence and by the sounds of it, intentionally.

It is the job of the armourer to count the rounds, check the rounds and load the gun. If the person is acting, then it is even more of a responsibility of the armourer, to ensure the safety of the actors. Actors are not soldiers, and i would not expect them to be experts on weapons, but even toy guns should never be pointed at a person less a plastic round goes of and hits someone in the eye. The armourer should never have allowed LIVE rounds anywhere near a studio plot. There is no need for live rounds except on a live firing range, or with the police.(or some crazy place in the US). But to be honest you can visually see the difference between a live round and blank. So the armourer screwed up big time. IMHO a weapon should have been checked not just by the armourer but by another person too. I always counted the rounds in and counted the rounds out, our rifle was always checked by the shooter and someone else and both confirmed. CLEAR! A tragic accident and the armourer has full responsibility for ensuring safety. No idea why the prosecution did what they did.

Baldwin was the producer. It was his set.

The judge ruled on Monday that Alec Baldwin’s role as a producer of the film was not relevant to this trial.

WA4TKGToday  12:42 pm JST

So it’s official, he’s gotten away with murder.

Point a gun at someone, pull the trigger, blame it on someone else.

This is how Hollywood works

It was a film set, you know...make believe, where the head armorer is responsible to make sure they're blank rounds. She was convicted. No actor checks to see if every round is a blank before firing.

the incompetence of armourer primarily and assistant director were the cause, not him.

"Get away with murder "

What, pray tell, was the MOTIVE for the "murder " ?

Where was the "mens rea " {guilty mind }

And anyway, negligence is NOT MURDER.

Stop using the term "murder ".

And, a good point made about DA's and prosecutors being ELECTED in some states.

What a recipe for disaster.

zibalaToday  12:43 pm JST

But, he was charged.

Why do you think he was in court?

After the head armorer was convicted of involuntary manslaughter, it should have never gone to court. She brought live ammunition to the set and lost track of them. It was a bogus charge against Baldwin.

JohnToday  01:42 pm JST

Baldwin was the producer. It was his set. He hired the cut-rate armorer. He ran the lax set.

There are five producers on the film Rust. Do you have any proof he was the producer that hired her. He solely ran the set?

BlacklabelToday  01:49 pm JST

Well looks like you CAN shoot and Jill someone and get away with it if your politics are convenient.

Because it was a film set where the head armorer gave him a gun with live ammo because she brought them onto the set and lost track of them. She was convicted. Sounds like it's you with a political agenda...as always.

JohnToday  01:42 pm JST

Baldwin was the producer. It was his set. He hired the cut-rate armorer. He ran the lax set.

why say something so blatantly false? i know why, it’s the maga crowd who don’t like baldwin because of trump. sad.

he was not involved in hiring.

Good. This is and never was his fault.

Saw this on the beeb earlier, complete with video.

So happy for him. Glad it’s all over.

absolutely right, abe234.

One of the tings here is the ability to judge someone on their skills, and expertise in a role.

If the armourer is the expert, has the skills, and has the legal rights, and responsibilities for the health, safety of the actors,(actually everyone) on set and must control weapons and ammunition, we shouldn't expect a movie director/expert to be an expert on say Ammunition. It is reasonable to expect a person of a professional skill level to reach that level. EG an armourer. However, you wouldn't expect here to have the same level of skills and knowledge either. if there was a medical emergency we wouldn't expect anyone to have the same level of skills as a doctor, even if the patient died. So it depends on what we would reasonably expect an ACTOR TO know about GUNS and bullets vs. WHAT a professional armourer, knows about weapons and bullets and did they fall below a level that a reasonable armourer would expect from another armourer on a movie set. Is it also reasonable to expect all actors/producers to be experts in bullets and weapons? Probably not. generally, we trust experts to keep us safe. Baldwin IMHO placed his trust in a licensed armourer, and she was negligent. Which also kind appears to be what the prosecution has done.

One of my dearest friend's lived and breathed the Hollywood world and I had the privilege to go on a few sets as a guest and watched the workings. From my understanding there are hundreds of people who put together the workings of a movie. I am no fan of Baldwin, unless knowing why he was aiming the gun at the woman producer such as did she ask him to point it, were they reversing for a scene there is no way of knowing beforehand and for sure he did not know there was a live round in it the man is not a criminal.

All kinds of questions about the prosecution: how do you destroy evidence without at least consulting a judge and probably the defense? Keystone cop type stuff. I guess they didn't realize that they were going to be under the microscope as well with this case.

The evidence was for a different case, completely. It was misfiled. The prosecutors should have shared it with the defense and didn't.

Sometimes US justice actions penalize the prosecution too much. The evidence wouldn't matter in the case at all, had it been disclosed, but because the head lawyer decided not to disclose it, a very difficult lesson was learned. Play fair or find a different job.

I don't care of Baldwin was innocent or guilty. His life has already been upended and I bet he hasn't gotten a good sleep in many months. I have no doubt he wasn't trying to harm anyone. I do doubt that the trigger was not pulled. Firearms don't just go off. Someone or some thing caused the pressure on the trigger sufficient for a discharge. I feel justice has been addressed in a reasonable way - for Baldwin.

The victims can still sue him in civil court

The victim is dead. The families might try, but they will lose. They can go after the production company and the armorer if they like for money. But many small scale productions create a legal entity for each film so there isn't anything beyond the money needed to make the film inside that company - basically, there's no money to sue to get. The young armorer likely doesn't have much beyond an old vehicle to "get", so a lawsuit doesn't make any sense.

Somebody, not Baldwin, got away with a perfect crime with malice aforethought, but Baldwin should be held liable for negligence and sued by the family of the deceased. I suspect this is not the end of the saga.

wow...shabby shabby shabby...if you are not gonna be a lawful law enforcement officer...don't be in law enforcement...if you're not going to be a professional about weapons safety of a movie set...don't be an armorer on movie sets...likely they can find jobs in the Russian prison system protecting Putin opponents

This case smelled funny from the start!

The actors are not responsible for the props.

Let's say it wasn't a gun, let's imagine Baldwin was on a prop balcony and it collapsed on to someone under it while he was on it, does anyone think he would be responsible?

The only reason I can see for the prosecutor charging him is they are trying to make a name for themselves!

Having a "tough on crime" a winning record, regardless of how you do it is extremely important in the USA.

Prosecutors are elected in many cases, I high profile conviction, is a major feather in the prosecutor's cap!

The victims can still sue him in civil court

But it won't be criminal

Baldwin was the producer. It was his set. He hired the cut-rate armorer. He ran the lax set.

I posted that Baldwin should not have been charged three years ago and any case dismissed. That has happened.

Alec sure got lucky on that one.

His negligence was criminal and I think a jury would have found him guilty.

I posted that Baldwin should not have been charged three years ago and any case dismissed. That has happened.

But, he was charged.

Why do you think he was in court?

The right decision which I made three years ago.

This was the expected outcome. He is a famous movie star and someone else prepared the weapon. They are the ones who should be punished.

So it’s official, he’s gotten away with murder.

Point a gun at someone, pull the trigger, blame it on someone else.

This is how Hollywood works