This is quite remarkable. Alec Baldwin broke down in tears during court today because the trial judge dismissed the case against him.
Apparently, the prosecution received a box of live ammunition from a witness. The ammunition was from the same lot used on the set of Rust. That evidence strongly suggested the live ammunition that made its way on to the set came from the prop supplier, rather than from the film’s armorer.
The question has always been, how did live ammunition get into the gun on the set? The prosecution team hid the evidence and never told the defense team, a clear Brady violation. [Print Media Report Here] WATCH:
.
As much as I dislike Alec Baldwin, this judge did the right thing. The evidence was at the center of the prosecution and withholding it was a gross violation of ethical responsibility of the prosecution. The charges should have been dismissed, and they were.
Right is right, even if nobody does it. Wrong is wrong, even if everybody does it. Using corrupt lawfare tactics and hiding Brady material is wrong. The prosecution should be sanctioned.
Perfect statement on right and wrong
Is there ethical prosecution anywhere?
Apparently not.
So concealing evidence is grounds for dismissal? Weird. Ok.
I think the j6ers might find that strange.
That’s why the Bundy case got thrown out. Not just thrown out but with prejudice because the prosecution was acting maliciously in that situation.
Sadly, it was partly because it was the second time they violated Brady in S NV (United States v Chapman et al, 2008). The court was aware the DOJ had previously provided mandatory additional training in Brady / Giglio.
…and they (the prosecution) do this sort of underhandedness all the time because winning is more important than truth to these Bums.
Not just any evidence. Go back and reread the article’s title. Then go look up the definition of exculpatory…
His point still stands in the cases of the January 6 defendants.
Someone ask Alec what does he think of the J6 convictions.
Apparently the more times the prosecution witholds vital evidence, the more dilute the judicial sanction – seeing that J6rs have been being in jail en masse for over 3 years of massive govt coverups vs a lying liberal connected POS like Alec Baldwin never seeing a day in jail …
I wouldn’t be surprised if some part of the prosecution and judge in commietard NM were in cahoots to take this dive. They would not want Alec to be late in his next TV appearance for the Dems. If not, then just another case of overeager prosecution at all costs that spoiled a conviction.
1) Did the prosecution screw this up on purpose?
2) Will this revelation get a new trial for the armorer, who has been convicted already?
Re “Did the prosecution screw this up on purpose?”
They obviously deliberately hid this evidence in the armorer’s trial to get her convicted; which, would have made it easier to convict Baldwin IF that evidence had not been brought out in his case. Since they hid it in the armorer’s trial, they had to continue to hide it in Baldwin’s trial to protect themselves…
Re “Will this revelation get a new trial for the armorer, who has been convicted already?”
Her conviction should simply be reversed without another trial. In addition, EVERY case the prosecutors have won should be revaluated to make sure they did not maliciously hide evidence in those cases.
What about the family of the woman who was killed? Will they now witness a murder trial on her behalf?
Yes and yes.
What about the movie’s armorer Hanna Gutierrez-Reed who was found guilty for loading the live round into the gun? Her lawyers have now moved to get the case dismissed now that Baldwin’s case has collapsed.
Her attorney was on Court TV a few minutes ago and said they were making their move on Monday for dismissal.
Good!
Now who prosecutes the prosecutor, who was willing to put innocent people in jail and ruin their lives?
I think the prosecutor(s) have immunity. As a result of the Enron prosecution, prosecutors (Weissmann) granted themselves immunity from being prosecuted for bringing false charges.
Just like Parole Boards (or DA’s for that matter) who have zero culpability when they release a criminal into the General Public only to have him or her murder or rape some innocent. Same goes for Pop-Psych “therapists” who believe drugs will fix some lunatic.
Only vigilante justice would cure them.
Baldwin and Gutierrez-Reed still were not innocent. They had been out target shooting with the guns a few times, using live ammo, and other members of the set had protested and quit due to Baldwin’s lax attitude to safety.
They were not on trial to see if they were ‘innocent’ They were on trial to see if they were. ‘guilty.’
Yes, first thing Monday morning (while their client sits in jail). You don’t expect het lawyer and the court to work weekends do you?
The prosecutors should have to serve Hanna’s sentence. That will put a stop to this type of BS
If the prosecutors had not concealed the mistake, she still could have been on the hook for involuntary manslaughter since presumable, she should have known the difference between a live round and a blank–that was her job.
Are there any ethical, honest prosecutors left anywhere?
Not likely. They’re all cut of the same jib & all coming from the same legal “training.”
Well, they are attorneys so…..no.
So now he will go back to be his normal loudmouthed self.
I guess the armorer gal has grounds for an appeal or release now, too.
I don’t think that is going to happen. People are sick of him left and right
Sometimes the ‘old self-assuredness’ (however misguided) is difficult to rekindle.
Particularly if he opens his mouth and gets quickly shot down.
Yes. Back on SNL next wknd making fun of President Trump. He is gross.
He is gross. I call him toe cheese.
Who had ultimate responsibility that dummy rounds (blanks) were loaded for that scene? The armorer? Baldwin? Who?
Just because there was live ammo at the scene doesn’t necessarily relieve the armorer of his responsibility in my mind.
Was there a reason to have live ammo for other scenes in the flick? IOW was there a reason there was live ammo present or was it never supposed to be there and never needed?
Not clear at all but then I have not followed the case at all.
If the supplier was supposed to provide both live and blanks then the live ammo from the witness meant nothing. If there was never supposed to be live ammo supplied for any reason then the prosecution is way flawed.
BTW the same lot number is mis leading and that box of ammo could have come from anywhere or had other same type and manufacturer rounds placed into that box and no one would ever know. Be like a package of veggies with the same expiration date
Correct me if I’m wrong, but it’s my understanding they were using the gun for target practice.
You seem to be correct.
It seems that early on in the investigation it was established there were live rounds on the location other than the one deadly round.
Something definitely smells.
The key would seem to be if the defendants lawyers already knew there were live rounds on the set and were so told by the prosecution. The sheriffs office was supposed to investigate exactly that. In that case one more box of ammo is not exculpatory.
Anyone have any more information?
The facts of the case become irrelevant when a prosecutor withholds any evidence that is “exculpatory, possibly exculpatory, favorable, or possibly favorable” to the defendant.
The issue here is that had defense counsel had this information for either defendant, then defense counsel could have raised reasonable doubt that the armored or Baldwin may really not have known that live ammo was put into the weapon by another party, potentially exonerrsting them from guilt or culpability.
The sheriff’s department did their job. The prosecution filed the evidence to be assigned elsewhere, in an effort to hide it because they knew it would be problematic for their case.
And the withholding of that evidence means that defense counsel was NOT aware when the evidence package from the DA came to them.
That is a huge no no in law.
Just because Baldwin is a POS and probably does have some culpability, doesn’t mean you can violate his civil rights or established rules and laws for evidence.
Nope, not that clear, for one thing this “evidence” was not brought in to the NM police until after the armorers trial and conviction were completed.
No evidence withheld in the armorer’s trial.
Read ab9ve. The prosecutor took the evidence brought in and put it an unrelated file!
The defense did not receive it during discovery because of that.
And to boot, they never made it available to the prior convicted armorer’s attorney afterwards so her defense counsel could file an appeal. A double whammy. Evidence that could overturn a conviction.
So, it is withheld. Brady violation.
Sundance spells it put crystal clear.
I did read everything in the link and background material in other links.
You ever heard of poison wells? My question again is was this really evidence when it was supplied by a friend of the father to the armorer AFTER her conviction. Why did that person wait? Where did he get it? “Good Samaritan” my old Aunt Rosey !
Prosecutors never take the stand, why? She literally threw the case. Why?
This whole mess is an intentional miscarriage of justice.
The more you read the producer Baldwin and the 24yo female armorer were not taking safety seriously on the set. That is what stands out.
It’s actually called “fruit of the poisonous tree.”
While I agree that the rest of your questions best merit, the fact is the prosecution is “required” to turn over all evidence, tainted or not, no exceptions. So that’s the basis for the ruling.
And I do agree that I think it is possible that prosecutor took the stand to throw the case.
And that would be yet another issue leading credence to the allegation that the prosecutor is unethical.
That being said, the state still cannot retry Baldwin because of what the prosecutor did.
This rule is in place to protect those truly innocent so that prosecutors cannot withhold evidence on those innocent where prosecutors are trying to frame defendants.
The rule has to be applied equally so as to prevent the appearance of impartiality.
I do not and never disagreed with the judge’s actions, he had no choice.
You and I agree more than disagree we are talking two different points in this.
I know what you meant by the statement below but it sure gave me a chuckle when I first read it.
“The rule has to be applied equally so as to prevent the appearance of impartiality.”
Exactly–well said Black Knight.
Yes. These anti-gun Commies had been out plinking and target shooting the guns after work several times, using live ammo. I think I might have read something about them having a plinking session the night before Baldwin shot the victim.
Who was doing target practice? Alec Baldwin, or someone else? Surely not Baldwin, who hates guns and gun owners?
Because if he had taken one NRA class instead of bashing the 2nd amendment, he wouldn’t have broken so many gun safety rules on set. And if he really hated guns so much, that can’t have been him doing target practice. But was he?
I read that the crew was linking in the down time. As producer, Baldwin should have stopped it.
Plinking. Thank you spellcheck.
Who was plinking? Baldwin?
Isn’t there a motion to dismiss in the Mar-a-Lago case for a similar reason that the prosecution created defective evidence in their handling of so-called classified files?
Right…..
We’ll analyzed & said, SD.
My only disagreement… The prosecution should be disbarred. This wasn’t an oversight. It was a criminal act that has already resulted in 1 defendant going to prison.
Unethical & illegal acts under color of law have to have a cost significant enough to be a deterrent.
The sad thing is, a woman died and no one will be held accountable.
Culpability has to be determined before accountability can be fairly applied.
It doesn’t serve anyones interest to do it in reverse.
There was a settlement in a civil suit.
Sounds like maybe we need a whole lot of prosecution lawyers disbarred. Although in that case I think the law should be changed to have them going to jail for as long as they were illegally trying to put someone else in jail.
Baldwin’s a jerk.
This is still the right decision.
Look at the conviction rate that Fedzilla prosecutors have. It’s almost 100 percent. I’m sure they are just that good.
Prosecutors who abuse their authority like this should earn the maximum sentence that could have been imposed on the defendant.
1000%
Sante Fe DA Mary Carmack-Altwies
is a Democrat
Mary Carmack-Altwies: 5 Fast Facts
https://heavy.com/news/mary-carmack-altwies/
So, expect no malicious prosecution charges or any action against DA Mary Carmack-Altwies for this stunt. ( most likely on purpose). She a part of two protected classes; Marxist Democrat Party and LGBTQUWERY++++. 🙄
Never mind – can’t say something nice so I will say nothing at all! Grandma’s rules…
“According to her website biography, Carmack-Altwies “lives in Santa Fe with her wife Jo, a retired law enforcement officer…”
That clears everything up now, doesn’t it?
Sanctioned? How about jailed? You’re too nice.
That’s the only remedy and that has to come from the BAR for unethical actions.
There are federal criminal statutes, 18 USC 241 & 242, conspiracy against rights & deprivation of rights, both under color of law. However, getting Biden’s DOJ to prosecute is another thing.
Baldwin and the other defendant, if and when she is released on appeal, may have civil rights civil (lawsuit) actions they could pursue under 42 US 1983 – false arrest, malicious prosecution and / or false imprisonment.
Personally, I think the false arrest won’t materialize because LEO had probable cause, but malicious prosecution, and false imprisonment for the armorer convicted may have merit.
I’m not putting it past these prosecutors to have created this Brady infraction purposely so as to get this result in court. The behavior of prosecutors in President Trump’s NY cases leads to this impression.
Listening to the reporting within the video provided by Sundance above (2:00 mark on), one might argue, “getting this result in court” had been a “work in progress” from the beginning.
Who, exactly, is this unidentified “supplier”?
The “Closing arguments” show on Court TV has done a great job covering all aspects of this and the theory of where the live ammo came from.
Perhaps it was hidden on purpose ? Cuz no accountability for the prosecutor and liberal icon walks free.
Brady v. Maryland (1963). SCOTUS ruled that the prosecution must turn over all exculpatory evidence. This was a Brady violation, and the judge was right to dismiss the case with prejudice.
Even jerks like Baldwin have constitutional rights.
“Even jerks like Baldwin have Constitutional rights.” Not that they ever give a fig about OURS, but yes. That’s right. Would that Hollyweird Communists like him respect the Constitutional rights of everybody else for a change.
How is ammo that was never in the state of New Mexico until 2 1/2 YEARS AFTER the incident exculpatory ?
The crime was discharging a weapon and killing a person.
Please explain how this has any relationship to this case AT ALL !
I am no fan of Baldwin either but I hope he sues the Santa Fe County DA for abuse of process and malicious prosecution.
I listened to that whole litany of wrongs … and wished President Trump had enjoyed such a fair judge.
Trump got the ‘smorgasbord’ approach from his NY judge.
Inviting the jury to brose the list of ‘potential’ violation and select a few good ones.
But not unlike the State Of Massachusetts preventing Karen Reed’s attorneys from reviewing the raw evidence in timely fashion.
Democrat judges are *very* fair to big shot, Hollywood turboliberal Democrat actors like Baldwin.
Sometimes terrible events which bring a man to his knees produce remarkable changes.
Baldwin, with his violent temper, has not covered himself…and by extension his family…with honour.
Will this be one of those times?
See Jim Carrey and Russell Brand.
For the sake of his children, I hope so.
Russell Brand is a win.
Has Carrey truly changed?
I hope so. He could bring so many people with him if he has.
It’s fun to watch people get red-pilled even if they still are Liberals.
Only God knows his heart, but it seems so.
I know that Russell Brand is awakened now, but has Jim Carrey had an epiphany too? I must’ve missed that one.
He has. He’s removed himself from the public eye. I’ve seen a couple of videos where he speaks of his coming to Christ. A whole nother person.
Ok… But, did the ammo walk itself to the pistol and jump into the cylinder????
Like a no fault divorce.
No fault for killing someone if you’re a lefty from Hollywood.
Not a big surprise. I think we all knew that he’d get away with it.
Sometimes experiences such as these humble a person; helps them to not be so judgemental and quick to “pass sentence” on others who have been wrongly accused.
Time will tell how it impacts Mr. Baldwin.
Federal civil rights charges could be filed unless Baldwin starts some enthusiastic attacks on Trump.
Next up: Prosecutor gets speaking part in Disney movie.
I call BS. How do we know that’s the truth. Doesn’t pass the smell test.
From the linked article: A witness confirmed to the judge on Friday afternoon that a special prosecutor in the case, Kari Morrissey, was directly involved in the decision to file the evidence in an entirely different case file separate from the other Rust materials.
So her decision was part of the chain of events that led to today’s case dismissal against Baldwin.
Also from the linked article: In a highly unusual move, Morrissey called herself to the stand to defend her conduct – despite instruction from the judge that she did not have to do so. “I was not aware at that point in time that it would not be linked to the Rust case number,” she said.
So she pleads ignorance around her decision, then has this to say when questioned about her feelings towards Baldwin.
“I actually really appreciate Mr Baldwin’s movies,” she said. “I really appreciated the acting he did on Saturday Night Live. And I actually really appreciate his politics.”
And this lady was a SPECIAL PROSECUTOR on the case and was directly involved in the decision to “withhold evidence” that ultimately led to today’s case dismissal and she took the stand and said those words?!?
And people are wondering if the prosecution F’d this up on purpose?
The DA is a Dem and and a Baldwin fan. Lovely. Was the “misconduct” intentional? This case has been going on for years and she “accidentally” loses evidence. Sure.
Mistrial.
Bingo!
lawfare in New Mexico, Nay couldn’t happen /s off
As a New Mexican let me just say, prosecutorial incompetence is hardly remarkable.
Look deeper. What’s the best way for Alec Baldwin to get out of this situation? Oops, prosecutors violate brady law. Judge dismisses. Yeah, it’s so neatly tied up with a nice bow that it smells from coast to coast.
Mark: I’m with you.
If you want this nonsense to stop, subject prosecutors to the same penalty the defendant faced. Simple.
He is acting.
The armorer was convicted of manslaughter and given an 18 month prison sentence. I wonder if they withheld this from her trial as well.
Oops, guess I should have read other comments befire making my own.
More than likely they did!
A friend of the father of the convicted armorer brought in the box of ammo to the NM police AFTER she was already convicted.
Is it evidence or isn’t it?
Would A prudent man recognize a bias in the motivations of the “witness” who supplied the ammo and the timing of the submission.
It would clearly be evidence to request that the conviction be set aside. I would imagine that the lawyer is preparing a request to the judge for that! Remember, the prosecutors have the evidence now!
The armorer’s defense counsel released a statement they would be filing on Monday.
Cops wouldn’t accept from me an hour after their departure, with my now Ex in cuffs, the actual weapon she destroyed my door with in an attempt to get at me, which I found while she was enjoying her booking downtown.
She claimed using an innocuous object to do the destruction, and whether they bought her story or not, they weren’t interested in returning for the actual medieval evidence, citing chain of custody.
I’d be quite interested in this situation to understand how this claimed evidence wasn’t subject to such scrutiny and suspicion.
Sounds like, if not an outright conspiracy, there are at least a number of bad actors.
agreed
It was an accident and blaming stupid actors for the armorers mistake was wrong.
There, I said it. This was a witch hunt from the start.
I read the deposition of the person who managed the scripts on set. She said Baldwin was very careless and did not follow gun protocol. Changed my mind.
No. Baldwin was the producer and in charge, and the man who pulled the trigger. He had allowed the crew to go target shoot with the firearms after work, using live ammo.
Fair enough. But he was the producer of this film, and I think he should still get his a$$ sued off for the work environment he is completely responsible for!
And one more thing; while there may not be enough evidence to try him for homicide, let’s not forget that this is a highly unstable individual! I would not be the least bit surprised if this sick bastard knew the gun was loaded. I mean, the ammo came from somewhere. Why not the producer?
I think there’s already been a settlement with the family for civil liability.
I see that now, thanks.
Correct me if I’m wrong, but an innocent person died, another was injured, and the individual who acted recklessly and pulled the trigger will go free.
Attorney Andrew Branca (Law of Self Defense) comes to a different conclusion. This was a slam-dunk, easy conviction that got thrown off course by immaterial claims. The prosecutor was a hired gun who had never been a prosecutor before. It’s worth listening to his explanation on his LOSD utoob channel.
The FBI and DOJ had all of the video evidence from the Capitol on J6 including video of protesters being invited in and escorted by Capitol Police while being cordial and non-violent.
None of that was turned over to the defense or shown to the jury in hundreds of prosecutions.
It took Tucker Carlson to publicly show on FOX the video of Chauncey with his Viking helmet being led around with a Capitol Police escort before the judge finally released the guy!
What is going on with the FBI and DOJ misconduct on top of Speaker Mike Johnson still holding back on the release of the video as well as a failure to have a Congressional hearing on the cold-blooded murder of Ashli Babbitt????
Loathe Baldwin, but wouldn’t wish prison on him based solely on his insufferable personality. The prosecutors, however, should be incarcerated immediately- no weekend for you.
Now if only justice can be delivered without politics on both sides of the aisle. exculpatory this decision is a flea on a flea ridden dog.
Also how about all the hidden exculpatory evidence in the Trump documents case? Maybe this helps?
No idea why the source of ammo matters. He violated the golden rule of treating any firearm “as if it’s loaded”… and someone died. I naively thought that’s what he was on trial for.
Not as often as the real criminals are the real criminals. And the politicians who force the prosecutors to let real criminals go free are criminals as well.
The “evidence” in question, a box of ammo, is turned in by a friend of the convicted armorer’s father on the day she was declared guilty in March. Where has it been for three years? There is the acrid smell of misconduct in the air. I’m not so sure it is emanating from the prosecution.
Good point
Hey! Didn’t Jack Smith do this to Trump???
Seems armorer Hannah Gutierrez Reed has a pretty decent case for appeal based on this
It may be that Sundance’s info may be incorrect, as are most the comments I have read so far. This is the deeper dive info I read about, but I am not saying it is absolutely correct. Defense motion claims a “good samaritan” delivered some ammo, similar to the live rounds found on the set, to the Sheriff’s office. Turns out this “good samaritan” is a friend of the armorer’s dad. This “evidence” was acquired during the armorer’s trial, and was logged into evidence by the Sheriff’s crime scene tech, but under a different case number than Baldwins. It is not clear what case it logged under. This “evidence” was not provided to the Baldwin defense prior to trial, when the defense requested all ballistic evidence. It was not clear from the reports what case it was logged under, but did the special prosecutors know about this ammo being booked into evidence? It may have been negligence and not in “intentional malfeasance. I am suspicious as to how and why a “good samaritan” (as characterized by the Baldwin defense motion) would suddenly show up with similar ammo. Was this a ploy by either or both defense teams to cast reasonable doubt? There was never a finding of how the live rounds got on the set. Is it possible a defense ploy turned lucky for the defense due to negligence causing a Brady violation? The fact that this ammo may have been similar or from the same lot as the live rounds actually has no bearing on the theory of criminal liability for Baldwin. I think there is a 50/50 chance the decision could be overturned if appealed.
The supposed “evidence” was never in New Mexico until March of 2024 – It had absolutely no connection to either case – the guy that brought it actually told the Sheriff’s Office personnel that it was never in New Mexico until he brought it there from Arizona – no bearing on Baldwin recklessly firing a firearm and killing someone !
What if it was planned for this outcome? He’s such a dem mouthpiece; maybe they saved him….🤔
A lie requires constant bolstering whereas the truth holds up unassisted for infinity.
I admire the “right is a right even if nobody is doing it” quote SD. I will keep and use that one. Its rule number one if one subscribes to the laws of humanity.
I would take a good look at the prosecutors, because they gave Baldwin a get out of jail free card.
Wish Jack Smith would take the stand and say he told the FBI to plant those classified document cover sheets at Mar Largo
All Baldwin had to do to prevent this tragedy was open the cylinder and check to make sure the pistol wasn’t loaded.
It was pounded into me from the time I was 12 years old that you always assume a firearm is loaded before doing anything with it. Always.
And Sundance is right about right and wrong. The prosecutor should be censured bigly.
Guilty as sin, free as a bird. Because of prosecutorial misconduct again. Rules have been clear for decades but the prosecutors never pay a price.