Alec Baldwin’s defence lawyers are attempting to prevent an involuntary manslaughter trial from proceeding against the actor-producer. The trial concerns the tragic death of a cinematographer during a rehearsal for the Western film “Rust.”
In a motion seeking to dismiss the charge, Baldwin’s lawyers are arguing that FBI forensic testing heavily damaged the firearm involved in the shooting before it could be thoroughly examined for any potential modifications that could clear the actor of any wrongdoing.
Related posts
On Monday, arguments will be presented to Judge Mary Marlowe Sommer in New Mexico. Baldwin’s trial is set to commence next month.
According to Baldwin’s legal team, the authorities have destroyed the most crucial evidence in the case – the firearm – by striking it with a mallet during the forensic analysis.
On 21 October 2021, tragedy struck during a rehearsal when Alec Baldwin, holding a gun on a movie-set ranch, accidentally fired it, resulting in the death of Halyna Hutchins and injury of director Joel Souza. Baldwin has since stated that he had pulled back the gun’s hammer but did not pull the trigger.
During the trial, prosecutors will showcase evidence indicating that the firearm was fully operational before the shooting and that it could not have discharged without someone pulling the trigger.
The defense team is drawing attention to a recently revealed expert analysis that emphasizes the ambiguity surrounding the source of the toolmarks found on the firing mechanism of the gun.
Baldwin maintains his innocence and has entered a plea of not guilty to the charge of involuntary manslaughter. If convicted, he could face a maximum sentence of 18 months in prison.
In March, Hannah Gutierrez-Reed, the armourer, was found guilty of involuntary manslaughter and was sentenced to 18 months in prison. Throughout the trial, an FBI expert testified that the gun had arrived at the FBI laboratory fully functional with all safety features. The expert further added that he had to use a mallet to strike the fully cocked gun and break it in order for it to fire without depressing the trigger.
The judge on Friday rejected the prosecutors’ plea to use immunity as a tool to force Gutierrez-Reed to testify against Baldwin during the trial. It is anticipated that the statements made by Gutierrez-Reed to investigators and safety regulators at her workplace will play a significant role in the trial of Baldwin.
The armorer’s unwillingness to testify may restrict additional testimony. However, the judge stated on Friday that if Gutierrez-Reed decides not to testify, other witnesses can provide most of the necessary information.
Marlow Sommer did not reveal her ruling but directed both parties to proceed with the assumption that the case will move forward.
She emphasized the importance of not interpreting it as an excuse to stop working on the trial.
Testimony is set to begin on July 10th and conclude on July 19th during the eight-day court trial.
During the hearing on Friday, Marlowe Sommer denied the defence attorneys’ request to dismiss the trial. The attorneys argued that Baldwin was not “subjectively aware” of the risks and had no reason to believe that the gun could contain live ammunition. However, their request was declined.
Involuntary manslaughter charges against Baldwin were dismissed by special prosecutors last year after they were informed that the gun used in the shooting might have been modified and malfunctioned. However, the prosecutors changed their stance after receiving a new analysis of the gun and managed to obtain a grand jury indictment.
