‘Rust’ movie set shooting trial: Why the involuntary manslaughter case against actor Alec Baldwin was dismissed

CNN
—

2 days later Alec Baldwin’s Nearly three years after the fatal shooting on the set of “Lust,” which sparked his manslaughter trial, a New Mexico judge ended the case with eight words that left the actor visibly emotional.

“The motion to dismiss is granted,” Judge Mary Marlowe Sommer told Baldwin and his defense team in court Friday afternoon, as an already shaking Baldwin removed his glasses, buried his face in his hands, sobbed and embraced his wife, Hilaria.

The ruling comes after nearly three years of Legal disputes He also touched on the change in prosecutors leading up to the trial of Baldwin, who could have faced up to 18 months in prison and a $5,000 fine in connection with the October 2021 shooting death of cinematographer Halina Hutchins on the set of the Western film “Lust.”

At the time of the shooting on October 21, 2021, Baldwin “Cross Draw” PracticeAt a church in New Mexico where the film was being shot, Hutchins pulled a gun from a holster opposite the one he was using to draw his gun and fired a live round from a prop gun, killing Hutchins and injuring director Joel Souza.

On Thursday, Baldwin’s defense team filed a motion to dismiss the case, arguing that prosecutors suppressed evidence. “This may suggest an outside source (prop supplier) of live ammunition.” Seth Kenny(Because the evidence would be in Baldwin’s favor), court documents state.

After a chaotic hearing Friday in which one special prosecutor took the stand as a witness and another special prosecutor, Erlinda Johnson, resigned from the prosecution team later that day, Judge Marlowe Sommer sided with the defense and granted a motion to dismiss the case as a result of evidentiary issues that first came to light Thursday, meaning the case cannot be refiled.

Special Counsel Kari Morrissey, answering questions from attorney Alex Spiro under oath on Friday, said she was disappointed with the decision not to prosecute.

“I think the defense misunderstood the importance of the evidence, but I have to respect the court’s decision,” Morrissey said after court on Friday.

Here is what led to the dismissal of the Baldwin case:

Judge Marlowe Sommer, who had been determined to keep the trial on schedule, was visibly upset when he suspended testimony in the case and dismissed the jury early Friday to consider Baldwin’s motion to dismiss the criminal charges against him.

Ahead of Friday’s ruling, the judge said a dismissal with prejudice would be a “very extreme sanction” and would require him to review each element of the case and “create a very clear record of why I see what I see.”

Baldwin’s lawyers argued that state investigators failed to properly inform the defense that a man had delivered to investigators a box of ammunition allegedly linked to the crime.

The defense argued in its motion that the state “unilaterally suppressed” evidence that could have been favorable to Baldwin’s trial. 1963 Brady v. MarylandThe rule requires prosecutors to “disclose.” Documents, exculpatory information According to Cornell Law School, “government-held documents will be provided to the defense.”

Marlow Sommer explained Friday that to prove a Brady violation, the defense must prove “that the prosecution suppressed evidence that was favorable to the defense and that the evidence was material to the defense.”

In court Thursday, crime scene technician Marissa Poppel testified that retired police officer Troy Teske delivered a box of ammunition to the Santa Fe County Sheriff’s Office in March after Gutierrez-Reed’s conviction. CNN previously reported.

Poppel said Teske, who was a friend of his gunsmith father, told investigators the ammunition may be connected to the “Rust” incident.

However, according to Poppel’s testimony, these items were classified separately from the Baldwin case, excluded from the “Rust” case inventory, and were never tested for a match to the fatal bullet.

Judge Marlow Sommer said Friday that the requirements for suppression of evidence in the Brady case had been met. “The Santa Fe County Sheriff’s Office and the prosecutor’s office failed to disclose the supplemental report to the defense and denied the defense an opportunity to inspect the bullet that Mr. Teske introduced into evidence,” he said.

The second element of the Brady case that Marlowe Sommer analyzed is whether the evidence suppressed by the prosecution was favorable to Baldwin “both as impeachment evidence and as exculpatory evidence,” she said.

“This requirement is met. The suppressed evidence is favorable to the defendant,” the judge wrote. “It is impeachment evidence, and it has been introduced as impeachment evidence at this trial, potentially exonerating the defendant.”

Marlow Sommer added that because the evidence was withheld, she was unable to analyse the exculpatory value of the evidence at such a late stage. She then considered whether the withheld evidence was material to the case, and concluded that it was.

“The belated discovery of this evidence during the trial prevented its effective use and affected the fundamental fairness of the trial,” Marlowe Sommer said, adding that Baldwin’s defense was not in a position to test the prosecution’s theory about the source of the live bullet that killed Hutchins.

The judge said the state had withheld evidence from Baldwin’s defense team and said prosecutors had “deliberately and knowingly” withheld information.

Marlow Sommer said, “Even if this act does not rise to the level of malice, it certainly comes very close to it and shows signs of searing.”

The judge also agreed that the late-filed evidence was “highly prejudicial” to Baldwin’s case.

“Jurors are sworn and in danger, and this disclosure comes too late during the trial, undermining the defendants’ trial preparations,” Marlowe Sommer said. “There is no way for the court to right this error.”

Just before granting the motion to dismiss the case, the judge added: “The State’s discovery violations caused an unnecessary and irreparable delay in the jury trial. Dismissal on appeal is justified in the interest of preserving the integrity of the judicial system and the efficient administration of justice.”

Gutierrez Reed’s attorney, Jason Bowles, indicated he intends to dismiss her lawsuit following the dismissal of Baldwin’s lawsuit.

“The judge found there was willful misconduct, but the state committed similar blunders in Hanna’s case,” Bowles said.

CNN’s Julia Vargas Jones contributed to this report.