Alec Baldwin Shoots and Kills Cinematographer, Wounds Director

[futureman 22342]

1 minute ago, BeardIP said:

shut your mouth, you fat little pig.

*thoughtless pig

[gofuckyourself 8057]

19 minutes ago, Helobious said:

lol at the replies. Pretty much unanimous agreement that the camerawoman is a cunt.

Yep. It didn't go the way "Malcolm FleX" expected.

He ignored his own advice.

 

 

[atomheartbevo 88913]

4 hours ago, gofuckyourself said:

A temper like that?

With that dumb bitch yelling at him on for a full minute...I'd have probably shot her ONE TIME, JUST ONE TIME, ONE TIME.

I’d like to see the security cam footage and the rest of the video.  I get suspicious when footage cuts off like that - for all we know she shook the phone or whatever.

[mr. sunshine 2819]

5 hours ago, ajax said:

 

 

Did she say "free Palestine"? As in that completely made up "nation."

I'll see myself to the Cloak Room now as painful as that will be

[Deej 76156]

1 hour ago, mr. sunshine said:

Did she say "free Palestine"?

Their chicken is amazing.

[futureman 22342]

1 hour ago, mr. sunshine said:

Did she say "free Palestine"? As in that completely made up "nation."

hey, kinda like israel. 

[freyguy 4239]

1 minute ago, futureman said:

hey, kinda like israel. 

all nations are made up

[futureman 22342]

nothing gets by you.

[hobbes2702 12516]

The last few post may be the best example of surly/shaggy conversation style on this website.

Edited April 24 by hobbes2702

[mr. sunshine 2819]

1 hour ago, futureman said:

hey, kinda like israel. 

Dammit. They got me again

[freyguy 4239]

1 hour ago, futureman said:

nothing gets by you.

[Captainant 26902]

The case against Baldwin has been dismissed with prejudice due to the prosecution withholding evidence

NYT gift link: ‘Rust’ Case Against Alec Baldwin Is Dismissed Over Withheld Evidence

Quote

 

A judge in New Mexico dismissed the case against Alec Baldwin on Friday after finding that the state had withheld evidence that could have shed light on how live rounds got onto a film set where the cinematographer was fatally shot.

The dismissal was with prejudice, meaning that the prosecution of Mr. Baldwin is over. If he had been convicted of involuntary manslaughter, Mr. Baldwin would have faced up to 18 months in prison.

“There is no way for the court to right this wrong,” Judge Mary Marlowe Sommer said in court as Mr. Baldwin wept.

...

The dismissal followed a dramatic scene when the lead prosecutor, Kari T. Morrissey, went from questioning witnesses to taking the stand herself. She gave an account of why a batch of ammunition that had been turned in to the state several months ago by a witness who claimed it was related to the “Rust” shooting had been put in an entirely different case file and was not handed over to the defense.

“It was my impression that they did not match the live rounds from the set of ‘Rust,’” Ms. Morrissey said on the stand, saying that she had only viewed a photo of the ammunition.

But when the ammunition was brought into the courtroom earlier Friday at the judge’s request it became clear that some of the rounds resembled those found on the “Rust” set.

The new evidence was brought into the courtroom in a manila envelope. Judge Marlowe Sommer put on blue latex gloves, cut it open with a pair of scissors and got down from the bench to examine the ammunition inside in the well of the courtroom as the prosecution and defense surrounded her. The examination determined that three of the rounds did, in fact, resemble the live rounds found on the set of “Rust” after the shooting.

“I never saw them until today,” Ms. Morrissey testified when she took the stand.

The failure to disclose the ammunition posed a major legal problem because the state is required to turn over key evidence to the defense.

“They buried it,” Luke Nikas, a lawyer for Mr. Baldwin, said in court. “They put it under a different case with a different number.”

 

TLDR - the prosecution had exculpatory evidence that was uncovered in court and the judge put the prosecutor on the stand to answer for his fuck up. Like out of a damn movie

[cmontexas 3209]

I think we should give New Mexico back

[Bookman 4569]

I've had a few bad days as a lawyer, but I've never had my case dismissed with prejudice in the middle of a jury trial.

[TwiceHorn 30834]

Assuming what the prosecutor said in court was true (which may or may not be a stretch), that is one of the less-egregious cases of misconduct I have seen/heard of.

Of course, even if what she said was true, it is possible cops/investigators pulled some shenanigans.

[mr. sunshine 2819]

46 minutes ago, Bookman said:

I've had a few bad days as a lawyer, but I've never had my case dismissed with prejudice in the middle of a jury trial.

I used to be a DA in Southeast Texas. DA of a neighboring county was a renowned dumbass. At his first jury trial the judge asked him to call his first witness and you could hear him whisper "oh shit" to his assistant

[Bookman 4569]

31 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

Assuming what the prosecutor said in court was true (which may or may not be a stretch), that is one of the less-egregious cases of misconduct I have seen/heard of.

Of course, even if what she said was true, it is possible cops/investigators pulled some shenanigans.

I suspect she buried the evidence not for the Alec Baldwin case but for the armorer case that's on appeal. 

[Incredulity 11160]

8 hours ago, cmontexas said:

I think we should give New Mexico back

I don’t think Spain has any interest.

[Captainant 26902]

1 hour ago, TwiceHorn said:

Assuming what the prosecutor said in court was true (which may or may not be a stretch), that is one of the less-egregious cases of misconduct I have seen/heard of.

Of course, even if what she said was true, it is possible cops/investigators pulled some shenanigans.

It seems like the cop on the scene opened another case file to segment off all of this evidence, and the prosecutor hung their hat on "it doesn't look like anything at all to me" when they had to ascertain if the two were linked. 

The kicker is gonna be that the armorer has a very viable appeal path now that key evidence in HER trial was intentionally withheld. What a complete clown fiesta 

Edited July 13 by Captainant

[Texzilla588 765]

I don’t think Spain has any interest.

I don’t think the Apache want it

[hornbri 1346]

1 hour ago, Captainant said:

It seems like the cop on the scene opened another case file to segment off all of this evidence, and the prosecutor hung their hat on "it doesn't look like anything at all to me" when they had to ascertain if the two were linked. 

The kicker is gonna be that the armorer has a very viable appeal path now that key evidence in HER trial was intentionally withheld. What a complete clown fiesta 

I watched the whole thing. It was a colossal fuck up. This is a good summary of what happened I copied:

Quote

For some background, this whole situation happened because the bullets were filed under a case number that was not the case number for the rust shooting. And so when the terrabyte of discovery was transferred, the bullets/images of bullets were not included (because it was a different file). A big part of the direct and cross of witnesses is around why the bullets were put under a different file.

The order of testimony was CST Poppel, Kenney (the bullets supplier), Hancock (lead on the case), Lt Brian Brandel (officer who spoke to Troy Teske when he dropped off the bullets).

CST Poppel

-Prosecution was focused on eliciting testimony that the bullets were not significant.

-The defense cross-examined the reasons why CST Poppel thought the bullets were not relevant. I should note that a lot of hard evidence (a report and body cam video) was only received by the defense right before the cross, so they did not have a chance to review and prep and likely did not have a clear picture of what the facts were and what they wanted to elicit in questioning.

Kenney did not provide anything that was important.

Hancock

-On direct, Hancock basically testified that she filed the bullets away under a different case number, because she did not not think the bullets were relevant or significant. She provided a whole explanation as to how the bullets did not match the live ammunition found on the rust set. She also said she never got an opportunity to speak with Teske and take a statement, and therefore could not determine whether the bullets were relevant.

-On cross, the defense also questioned Hancock's reasoning for why the bullets were/were not significant.

-Neither prosecution nor defense tried to elicit testimony that Hancock had been directed to file the bullets away under a different file number.

-At the end of Hancock's testimony, the judge asked a few questions. The judge asked whether Poppel and Hancock discussed whether the bullets should be filed under a different case number. Hancock gave a longwinded answer but admitted to having conversation with Poppel about the bullet filing. Then, after a series of follow-up questions, the judge just asked Hancock who gave her the direction to file the bullets under a different case number, and Hancock said it was prosecutor Morrissey that directed her to do so.

Lt Brian Brandel

Brian Brian Brandel provided important testimony about two things.

-He testified about his interaction with Teske, who brought the bullets in (the whole thing was recorded via bodycam and video was entered).

-He also testified about a part of a report about the bullets, in which he wrote "it should be noted that this is not actual evidence from the death investigation..." This line in the report was subject to a great cross-examination during the earlier CST Poppel testimony.

-During Brandel's testimony, it finally became why that was written in the report. Brandel said that he was directed by Corporal Hancock to not include the bullet in the investigation of the death, until she followed up with Teske about the bullet.

Morrissey

It was only after Hancock testified, that Morrissey volunteered to offer testimony under oath. The most critical moment was when Morrisey testified about the conversation between her and Hancock: Corporal Hancock said she was going to create a Dock Report, and Morrissey responded with "great, do that". Morrissey claims that she was not aware, at the time of that conversation, that a Dock Report would have a different case number.

Again, it should be noted here that Morrissey essentially admitted that had actual knowledge, this entire time, of a conversation between herself and Hancock where they talked about creating a Dock Report. She also admitted that she had actual knowledge, the entire time, of why the bullets were put under a different case number. But nowhere during the initial motion argument, the direct of CST Poppel, or the direct of Corporal Hancock did Morrissey disclose this information.

Morrissey was cross-examined by the defense on whether or not she was misleading the court earlier during the questioning of Corporal Hancock. The defense questioned whether Morrissey followed her duty of candor to the court.

 

[Armybrat 40527]

26 minutes ago, Texzilla588 said:

I don’t think the Apache want it

They want the Texas Hill Country back.

[randomhorn 1500]

31 minutes ago, Armybrat said:

They want the Texas Hill Country back.

Who wouldn’t 

[Gil Bang 25551]

3 hours ago, TwiceHorn said:

Assuming what the prosecutor said in court was true (which may or may not be a stretch), that is one of the less-egregious cases of misconduct I have seen/heard of.

Of course, even if what she said was true, it is possible cops/investigators pulled some shenanigans.

holy shit dude...her 2nd chair resigned in the middle of the hearing.   And, she swore herself in as a witness, after the judge spent 5 minutes trying to convince her not to do so.  It was a trainwreck. 

 

"Did you refer to my client, Mr. Baldwin, as a 'cocksucker'"

Prosecutor: "I don't recall"

Did you say "I'm gonna get that cocksucker"

"I don't recall"

[cmontexas 3209]

Nothing more American than a little prosecutorial misconduct to win political points

[Armybrat 40527]

1 hour ago, randomhorn said:

Who wouldn’t 

Meh….the property taxes would be quite a burden.

[Armybrat 40527]

1 hour ago, Gil Bang said:

holy shit dude...her 2nd chair resigned in the middle of the hearing.   And, she swore herself in as a witness, after the judge spent 5 minutes trying to convince her not to do so.  It was a trainwreck. 

 

"Did you refer to my client, Mr. Baldwin, as a 'cocksucker'"

Prosecutor: "I don't recall"

Did you say "I'm gonna get that cocksucker"

"I don't recall"

Baldwin should make a movie about it all.

[mchookem 15535]

i mean...a lady was shot and killed. it seems like the bullets would be extremely relevant and significant. 

[futureman 22342]

5 hours ago, Armybrat said:

They want the Texas Hill Country back.

wasn’t the hill country comanche?  I thought apache was further west.

[futureman 22342]

well nm, I guess the apache were there first and the comanche came down in the 1700s and started fucking with them, according to the google machine. 

[Texzilla588 765]

They want the Texas Hill Country back.

The Comanche ran the Apache out out Texas long ago.

[Armybrat 40527]

1 hour ago, futureman said:

wasn’t the hill country comanche?  I thought apache was further west.

Apaches were in the Hill Country & West Texas first, the the Comanches swept into Texas from the Rockies mid 18th Century and pushed  them out of the plains southward and westward to New Mexico.

The Comanches were the first equestrian plains tribal group.

[TonyTexas 10406]

1 hour ago, futureman said:

wasn’t the hill country comanche?  I thought apache was further west.

I always thought the Apache were from the Bronx. I know they had a fort there. 

[Texzilla588 765]

Baldwin is about to get hammered by the victim’s widower for breach. Seems he hasn’t been paid as agreed.

[AUS-97HORN 11550]

I wouldnt be shocked if Baldwin loses his ass in the civil trial.   Its a much lower standard for conviction.  Its also how Nicole and Ron's families basically crippled OJ's ability to make/hide money

[Horn80 5997]

1 hour ago, futureman said:

wasn’t the hill country comanche?  I thought apache was further west.

Think Tonkawa were in the Austin area and got pushed out.

[Helobious 9408]

1 hour ago, AUS-97HORN said:

I wouldnt be shocked if Baldwin loses his ass in the civil trial.   Its a much lower standard for conviction.  Its also how Nicole and Ron's families basically crippled OJ's ability to make/hide money

Lol. OJ had a six-figure pension until he died. They couldn’t touch it.

[Neonmoon 38126]

9 hours ago, hornbri said:

Then, after a series of follow-up questions, the judge just asked Hancock who gave her the direction to file the bullets under a different case number, and Hancock said it was prosecutor Morrissey that directed her to do so.

[Dahobbs 17180]

2 hours ago, AUS-97HORN said:

I wouldnt be shocked if Baldwin loses his ass in the civil trial.   Its a much lower standard for conviction.  Its also how Nicole and Ron's families basically crippled OJ's ability to make/hide money

They already agreed on a settlement. Apparently the production company hasn't paid the lump sum cash portion of it due to an insurance dispute. Easiest path for future litigation is enforcement of the settlement, but they may be able to revive the whole suit and re litigate. 

[RomaVicta 29500]

On 7/13/2024 at 10:11 AM, Armybrat said:

They want the Texas Hill Country back.

That's between them and the Comanche. 

[RomaVicta 29500]

On 7/13/2024 at 12:03 PM, Armybrat said:

Baldwin should make a movie about it all.

Wes Anderson on line one.

A Film by Wes Anderson

Starring Tilda Swinton,

With Edward Norton Bill Murray Jason Schwartzman

Narrated by Alec Baldwin

['stache 21520]

I still can't get over the fact that he was handed what was supposed to be a prop gun that somebody else fucked up before he pulled the trigger. How is he criminally responsible for something like that, specifically with regard to criminal intent? I can see a civil case not based on his pulling the trigger, but if he had significant control over the set and he hired, trained, supervised poorly in the area of safety on a set including several firearms. But criminal responsibility? It never made any sense to me whatsoever. 

[Brisketexan 103515]

I still can't get over the fact that he was handed what was supposed to be a prop gun that somebody else fucked up before he pulled the trigger. How is he criminally responsible for something like that, specifically with regard to criminal intent? I can see a civil case not based on his pulling the trigger, but if he had significant control over the set and he hired, trained, supervised poorly in the area of safety on a set including several firearms. But criminal responsibility? It never made any sense to me whatsoever. 

It never did. Civil liability, easy to see (at the very least, because sloppiness and lax controls as producer). Criminal? Nope.

[Armybrat 40527]

10 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

It never did. Civil liability, easy to see (at the very least, because sloppiness and lax controls as producer). Criminal? Nope.

Correct, he obviously never intended to shoot anyone.

But he still bears some responsibility for negligence because of careless handling of a firearm, unloaded, loaded, blanks, whatever.

There have been other cases of actors being injured or killed on the movie set by guns loaded with actual blanks, and Baldwin should be aware of that.

['stache 21520]

2 minutes ago, Armybrat said:

Correct, he obviously never intended to shoot anyone.

But he still bears some responsibility for negligence because of careless handling of a firearm, unloaded, loaded, blanks, whatever.

There have been other cases of actors being injured or killed on the movie set by guns loaded with actual blanks, and Baldwin should be aware of that.

How is it negligence to pull the trigger on a gun prepared by a professional armorer whose job it is to ensure that the prop guns are all props? I know nothing about guns, if I'm an actor on a set, I'm not doing shit to the gun except exactly what the professional armorer tells me to do, and I'm not fiddling with shit since it's the armorer's job to ensure it's safety. This line of reasoning popped up originally and make zero fucking sense. Again, if the armorer wasn't qualified enough, or if he was aware of and failed to remedy lax procedures on ammunition, there might be a civil claim, but what crime could he have possibly committed? 

Edited July 14 by 'stache

[Armybrat 40527]

I agreed with Brisket there was nothing criminal on Baldwin’s part.

[Texzilla588 765]

How is it negligence to pull the trigger on a gun prepared by a professional armorer whose job it is to ensure that the prop guns are all props? I know nothing about guns, if I'm an actor on a set, I'm not doing shit to the gun except exactly what the professional armorer tells me to do, and I'm not fiddling with shit since it's the armorer's job to ensure it's safety. This line of reasoning popped up originally and make zero fucking sense. Again, if the armorer wasn't qualified enough, or if he was aware of and failed to remedy lax procedures on ammunition, there might be a civil claim, but what crime could he have possibly committed? 

If you take drivers Ed, pass the test, and then decide to drive recklessly and stupidly and kill an innocent pedestrian, some circumstances could generate criminal charges same as these.

There are very strict standards of weapons handling on set. Baldwin knows those and has a known habit of flaunting them. They weren’t shooting a scene. He had no need of a weapon. He was fucking around with it and shot the woman who died of his actions regardless of armorer ineptness. First rule don’t point a gun at someone loaded or unloaded. I hope the family nails his ass since the agreement is in breach.

[RomaVicta 29500]

1 hour ago, Brisketexan said:

(at the very least, because sloppiness and lax controls as producer)

Et tu, Brisket.

How well do you know the responsibilities of various producers associated with a film project?

The most common false assumption throughout has been that modern producers are all like David O. Selznick. He's not. 

You know better than I if he has liability as a part owner of the product, but he had zero responsibilities for running the set. I've worked on films.

[RomaVicta 29500]

1 hour ago, Texzilla588 said:

If you take drivers Ed, pass the test, and then decide to drive recklessly and stupidly and kill an innocent pedestrian, some circumstances could generate criminal charges same as these. (You have no idea what you're talking about. I can't think of a less apt metaphor no matter how homey and "my dad always told me" it sounds.)

There are very strict standards of weapons handling on set. (True. What you write after this shows how little you know about them even after having it explained over and over.)

Baldwin knows those and has a known habit of flaunting them. People say... Another lie as far as I can tell. I googled Alec Baldwin flaunting gun rules. Here's what I got:

Quote

Prosecutor Erlinda Johnson focused on Baldwin's reckless behavior on set, saying he violated the “cardinal rules of firearm safety” by pointing a gun at a person and pulling the trigger. 

Every entry on the first page refers to this quote from the prosecutor.

Why doesn't she claim what you're claiming, that he violated the strict rules about guns on a movie set and had done so often? Maybe because it's only bullshit that amateur political operatives keep shamelessly repeating. 

They weren’t shooting a scene. What do you suppose they were doing on a set with the director of photography (DP) behind the camera, and the director right behind her, and the star in front of the camera? Truly, what possible activity do you suppose was going on?

He had no need of a weapon. Correct. He was neither hunting, nor defending himself, nor exercising his sacred right to belong to a well ordered militia. However, he did have need of a prop for the scene they were about to shoot. I suppose you know that even in Westerns the actors aren't handling loaded weapons. They're handling firearms that are props. They are in no way intended to be weapons. The whiskey bottles don't contain real whisky, either. The bottles are real, the contents are not.

He was fucking around with it and shot the woman who died of his actions regardless of armorer ineptness. What? You speciously claim there was no scene being shot (the walk through prior to rolling camera is part of shooting a scene, Orson), and now you build on that lie by saying, with the same support your other remarks are upheld by, that ol' Alec was just fucking around. By sheer coincidence, Alec wandered into a room where no scene was shooting then happened to encounter the DP and director and other members of the crew. Before he knows it, a "weapon" appears in his hand and he's going all Buffalo Bill Cody's Wild West Show.

Shame on you for exploiting the death a woman widely loved and admired by colleagues including Baldwin. 

Halyna Hutchins

First rule don’t point a gun at someone loaded or unloaded. I hope the family nails his ass since the agreement is in breach. You're a very small and shameless person who evidently finds his identity in parroting hate-based lies about a person whose politics you disagree with. I think the word is despicable.

Fuck you for repeating bullshit you know nothing about. Negged. Knowingly and frequently repeating lies and lame sophistry is at least as bad as creating the original lie. The original lie may have been an error or have been atoned for.

Negged. Point by point responses above in the quote box.

If a court finds Baldwin owes damages as part owner of the rights, then he should pay. There's usually insurance for that and the production is a corporation unto itself with limited liability.  The prosecution on manslaughter and any criminal liability have been made ridiculous yet again. Give it up.

Edited July 14 by RomaVicta

[Brisketexan 103515]

44 minutes ago, RomaVicta said:

Et tu, Brisket.

How well do you know the responsibilities of various producers associated with a film project?

The most common false assumption throughout has been that modern producers are all like David O. Selznick. He's not. 

You know better than I if he has liability as a part owner of the product, but he had zero responsibilities for running the set. I've worked on films.

I don't KNOW if he should be held civilly liable for his actions/inactions as a producer.  I don't have all the evidence - not even close to it.  I have, however, read enough facts that would support a colorable claim and discovery into the facts and circumstances of the event to determine if he is liable.

This was a small production, and there are allegations that he was aware of sloppiness on the part of the armorer and the handling and prep of weapons.  IF that were true (the "if" is the part you find out in discovery), then yes, he may and perhaps should be found liable for negligence.  Same as if he was aware that his crew was regularly driving around local roads drunk as shit in production vehicles.  Senior personnel can have personal liability if they know of a risky situation and allow it to continue.  If there ends up being any basis for legal consequences against Baldwin, that's where they'll come from.