New Mexico Grand Jury Indicts Alec Baldwin for Involuntary Manslaughter
“…the trigger had to be pulled or depressed sufficiently to release the fully cocked or retracted hammer of the evidence revolver.”
A New Mexico grand jury indicted Alec Baldwin for involuntary manslaughter for the death of a cinematographer on the set of his film Rust.
Baldwin faces 18 months in prison.
“We look forward to our day in court,” stated Luke Nikas and Alex Spiro, Baldiwn’s lawyers.
This is the second time Baldwin has faced charges in the death of cinematographer Halyna Hutchins two years ago.
Hutchins was shot on the set while preparing for a scene with Baldwin when the gun went off.
Baldwin swears he never pulled the trigger.
Prosecutors charged Baldwin in January 2023, but dropped the charges three months later when “Baldwin’s defense team raised questions about whether his Colt .45 was functioning properly when it fired.”
Kari T. Morrissey and Jason J. Lewis, a new prosecution team, sent forensics the gun over the summer for more tests:
Their experts, Lucien and Michael Haag, reconstructed the gun — which had been broken during FBI testing — and concluded that it could only have been fired by a pull of the trigger.
“This fatal incident was the consequence of the hammer being manually retracted to its fully rearward and cocked position followed, at some point, by the pull or rearward depression of the trigger,” the report concluded. “Although Alec Baldwin repeatedly denies pulling the trigger, given the tests, findings and observations reported here, the trigger had to be pulled or depressed sufficiently to release the fully cocked or retracted hammer of the evidence revolver.”
Morrissey and Lewis said in October that they intended to take the case to a grand jury within two months, stating that “additional facts” had come to light that pointed toward Baldwin’s culpability.
DONATE
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
Comments
no one is above the law?
If a man who accidentally killed a threat to others on a subway can be charged, a famous actor who pointed a gun at a person can also be charged.
If a law enforcement officer can deliberately shoot and kill an innocent woman (Ashli Babbitt) and then be exonerated for the unprovoked and deliberate murder of another human being then what are the actual chances that Baldwin is going to be found guilty of involuntary manslaughter for the death of Halyna Hutchins.
No one is above the law? Two-tier justice system, indeed.
Exonerated without an interview. Byrd NEVER spoke to investigators, never offered any kind of statement, not even a written statement. I’m not sure how any law enforcement officer can be in an officer involved shooting, not file any paperwork and still be employed. But, here we are.
Yes, interesting that. How a law enforcement officer cans shoot and kill another human being and then not face any kind of public inquiry over the shooting and death,. But I attribute that to the fact that Babbitt was a White woman. And as we’ve seen time and time again White people don’t matter. It doesn’t matter if a black kills a White. But oh my, if a White kills a black then there’s a huge problem. An inquiry. Possible homicide charges and imprisonment. And federal charges.
But not in this case. Why? Byrd was black. Babbitt was White. And that is the end of it,.
The Capitol Police Officer may have been protected by his race, but Ashli Babbit was shot for being a Trump supporter.
I read only recently that at the time of the shooting, Byrd falsely reported that he was being shot at. Funny how that dropped off the radar.
Keep in mind that this is an anomaly. Baldwin is a famous, rich, Leftist. Usually they are above the law in everything. Expect no real penalty, because that would be used as a bad example to hold other famous, rich, Leftists to account.
Subotai Bahadur
They had to go after him. The governor of NM has decided this year’s legislative session (a whopping 30 days) should be devoted to disarming the citizens of NM.
Correct. Every post here on LI said that Baldwin would never ever be indicted because he was a Democrat and because. of the Actor’s Guild. Now we know that all of you LI retards were wrong. I say this as a proud LI supporter who supports this blog financially.
I see you continue to be drunk at all hours of the day jr…
You think paying $$ allows you to call people names?
Hey Admin, take care of this
an exception does not invalidate the rule
What I expect happened is that the women that died had rejected Alex’s sexual advances and he decided to kill her. He took the gun, secretly slipped a round into the gun, and rotated the cylinder until the live round was under the hammer. Then he pointed the pistol at the woman behind the camera and pulled the trigger hitting the woman and killing her.
Nah. My money is on him just being pig ignorant about guns and arrogantly proud of it. Talking on your his instead of paying attention to the gun safety briefing says it all.
…on your PHONE…
There was a whole lot of nonsense going on that led up to this
Except that somehow a live round was inserted in the cylinder and the cylinder was rotated so the live round was the next to fall under the hammer and fire. This isn’t likely to be an accident.
Alec Baldwin indicted on two counts of involuntary manslaughter. Will miracles never cease? I hope the prosecutor doesn’t wimp out and give him some slap on the wrist plea deal bargain to keep him out of court and more importantly out of prison. Baldwin deserves everything he gets for his actions (and subsequent lies) on that day. That’s for sure.
Sorry, made a mistake. It’s only one count of involuntary manslaughter. Either a misdemeanor (negligent use of firearm) or a felony (without due caution or circumspection). Not both.
Guess which one he’ll be charged with. (HINT: Won’t be the felony count.)
It’s being reported elsewhere that both options are felonies. The wording in the document enclosed here absolutely does not make sense — it says in one breath that it is and isn’t a felony.
Where’s Andrew Branca?
He’s going live on his YouTube channel on Saturday to discuss the indictment. I believe it’s starts at 12:00, but am not positive. You might want to check out his channel if you’re interested.
https://www.youtube.com/@Lawofselfdefense
12:48 Andrew’s YouTube video stops, a message appears: Video removed for violating Youtube TOS
WTBF?
YouTube is the worst. Luckily, he’s got the whole thing posted to X…
https://twitter.com/LawSelfDefense/status/1748752339622850606
I believe this is largely correct. He’s been indicted for felony involuntary manslaughter. The indictment includes two alternative theories that either the judge or jury can select. Whichever theory they go with, the maximum period of incarceration for involuntary manslaughter in New Mexico is only 18-mos. I haven’t read anything that indicates that judges in NM are compelled by law to hand-down a minimum sentence. So, it’s plausible he could get probation, I guess. Andrew Branca is going to be discussing this today on his YouTube channel. So, I’m sure he’ll get very granular on the potential sentencing outcome, as he always does.
He will serve no time or very little
It sure is too bad that Baldwin had such a hair up his crack about the NRA. He definitely could have benefited from one of their basic safety courses. And — unlike the armorer who was “little people” on the Rust set — an NRA instructor would have confiscated Baldwin’s phone for inattention and made him listen to the course content.
This is the charge he should have already been convicted on. But instead they started the case with a prosecutor who was also serving as a state legislator, against the state constitution. Then they tried to add an enhancement that didn’t pass into law until after the crime had taken place. Then there was that inexplicable flub where suddenly, there were tales flying around of the gun malfunctioning, and they dropped the original charges.
So the question is, can the prosecution rehabilitate their credibility and pursue this case without stepping on their own feet?
Then there was that inexplicable flub where suddenly, there were tales flying around of the gun malfunctioning, and they dropped the original charges.
Started by Baldwin himself and his defense lawyers. Baldwin always maintained (and still does) that he didn’t pull the trigger. So prosecutors dropped the charges until they had expert proof that they only way that the weapon was going to discharge its contents (the bullet) is if Baldwin had the trigger cocked and that he pulled the trigger.
I know you didn’t mean “had the trigger cocked” but rather were referring to the hammer. In any case it appears from what pictures I’ve seen he did it in the opposite sequence; he pulled the trigger first, then cocked the hammer. The hammer will not stay back but will drop as soon as you release thumb pressure on it. It’s how you fan a single action revolver (which should remain a movie stunt as it’s abusive, ultimately destructive to the firearm but if it’s not yours but only a movie prop who cares).
It’s a common rookie mistake to immediately put your trigger finger on the trigger.
The guy always needed to be charged. He is at the moment the executive producer and therefore ultimately responsible for overall safety on the set. Yet if memory serves several sources say he didn’t attend mandatory SAG firearms. safety training. Remember, several crew members walked off the set just a few days prior to this fatal shooting due to unsafe conditions.
One of their complaints of I recall is that there should never be live ammo on a movie set. Yet there was. That again is due to him failing at his job as the producer.
Also, he was the one handling the revolver when he shot two people. Although he’s trying to evade his responsibility that is entirely his fault as an actor as he was the last link in the safety chain.
If the trial is on tv will they pay him scale?
I don’t know, is he a Pisces?
Wait, I am confused. The FBI broke the gun? It had to be reconstructed to be forensically analyzed? That’d be a tough pill for me to swallow as a juror.
Defense alleged gun was nonoperational. FBI breaks it more. Gun is fixed and then works? Duh. It was fixed.
I hope Baldwin faces real consequences for what I think was obviously an easily avoidable wrongful death. If the above is what it relies on, how could it possibly stick?
It’s not like this is a first, or anything.
It was widely reported that the gun Mark McCloskey handed his wife was one he had used as a courtroom exhibit, and had been intentionally disabled by installing the firing pin and its spring backwards. (And that was a wise move, since his wife had probably never handled a gun in her life, and minced this one around like a Limoges teacup.) St. Louis’s Soros DA made her crime lab reassemble the gun into firing condition, so that she could enhance the charges.
But…that’s a crazy thing to do. “Judge, the gun malfunctioned!”
“Well, Your Honor, after we fixed it it worked just fine, so we don’t know what the defendant is talking about!”
That’s bonkers.
If you or I did it, it would be “tampering with evidence.”
I stand 100% behind Alec baldwin
It’s waaaaaaaayyyyyy too dangerous to stand in front of him….
Mary: Where is Andrew?
Involuntary? How is it involuntary when you point a gun at somebody and pull the trigger? And we know he pulled the trigger because that’s how single action revolvers work. They don’t go bang unless you cock the hammer then pull the trigger
I guess sincerely believing the gun was unloaded would legally make it involuntary. Ignorant AND stupid, but involuntary.
Baldwin has deeper pockets then the state of New Mexico. He will wriggle out of this just like he did the last time. The unfortunate movie “armorer” will take the fall for him.
All other things being equal, the armorer was somewhat of a dipshit herself. When you have to call Daddy to ask him how some type of gun or ammo works, you may be qualified to be an assistant armorer, but not a chief. Plus, she personally fell afoul of a sneaky NM law forbidding carry of any type into any establishment licensed to serve alcohol. Sneaky for non-residents, because the posting isn’t at the door, where you would see it, but at the service counter with the business licenses; and because when you stop at “Sal’s Corner Pizza” where you’ve never been before, you have no idea that they’re licensed for wine. (Yes, I experienced this gotcha myself a couple weeks ago. But I didn’t get made… and I didn’t make the same mistake again.)
State gun laws are a patchwork, and as a pro, it’s her job to know what they are.
There is NO good reason/defense for pointing a loaded gun at someone and pulling the trigger.
They do it in the movies all the time.
Except the actors don’t actually point real, operable guns at people. Either the “gun” is prop (not capable of firing), or if it is a real gun, they use camera angles that look like it is pointed at a person, but in practice is not.
This is incorrect. Actors point operational guns at (or just to the side of) ‘people’ all the time. Those people are almost always camera operators. Sometimes they actually pull the trigger and fire a blank round. Hollywood has actually built camera dollies that are outfitted with thick, plexiglass shielding to protect the camera operator and the DP who is often standing immediately behind or next to the camera operator.
There’s a great video on Youtube by a Hollywood prop master/armorer (Scott, Prop & Roll) who’s done a few videos on gun safety on set and the different kinds of ‘prop’ guns that are used (tl;dr many of the guns used on set are props at all). Several of the videos were done long before the Baldwin tragedy and he made another that specifically addressed all the problems on the set of the movie in question. That specific video is BRUTAL indictment of the unprofessionalism and lack of standards and best practices on the set.
No, they don’t.
Do too!
I do not believe that handling guns on a movie set is done under the same rules as at a shooting range. I’m just not buying it. Who in the world would trust Nicholas Cage with a loaded gun? Or Nick Nolte? Or Alec Baldwin? Two other people,were responsible for checking that the gun was not loaded with live ammo, and both failed: the Armorer, who loaded the gun and was responsible for all weapons and ammo, and the Assistant Director who checked the ammo before declaring the gun cold as he handed it to Alec Baldwin. The Assistant Director had the better attorney. He copped a deal as soon as possible. After all, everyone on set heard him call out that the gun was cold (safe). I’m looking forward to Andrew Branco’s You Tube discussion at noon.
The only person responsible for checking that the gun was unloaded was the person pointing it at another human. If I handed you a pistol would you point it at someone? If I stood next to you and watched you clear the weapon I would still check for myself before pointing it at someone. That young lady armorer is a scapegoat. Baldwin should have checked for his own peace of mind.
Disagree. The job of the armor is to make sure the weapons are safe for filming. She failed her job. Her failing to do her job, however, does not absolve Baldwin for his actions, He is also responsible for what he did with the gun (and he should have checked).
So you disagree…but then you agree.
People screw up all the time. For Baldwin to ignore this reality and trust an armorer who is just a step between his supplying the weapon for the movie as producer, and pointing it at someone is grossly negligent on his part. This is why airliners have two pilots.
She check and found no live rounds in the gun and handed it to Baldwin. He must have gone for coffee before the they were workin on the scene and in that time he swapped a live round for a blank and rotated the cylinder so the live round would fire when the trigger was pulled.
That’s not entirely accurate. Below, a working Hollywood propmaster explains how things are supposed to work on a movie set and how that differed from what actually happened on Baldwin’s set. There are several people with culpability, including Baldwin, both as the ‘shooter’ and arguably as the producer as well.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TP1X5L-AufQ
So just because they are on a movie set the four immutable common sense rules of safe gun handling are ignored? Like I stated earlier, movie set or not, no matter how many armorers have inspected the firearm before me, as a person who respects others and their safety I will inspect any firearm that I’m supposed to point at anything.
While I wouldn’t quite put it the way you have, yes. Because of how movies are made, conventional firearm safety practices are not practical. In the real world, no one should ever point a firearm at someone else even if the weapon has been cleared.
But, in a TV and movie production setting, the reality is sometimes weapons are pointed and even fired in the direction of other actors or gaffers, DPs, camera operators, directors and other members of the crew. That’s simply the reality of filming. There are a LOT of additional safety measures that are supposed to be followed on a movie set including the person holding the weapon confirming for THEMSELVES that the weapon is in a safe state. Baldwin didn’t do that. It also appears almost none of those precautions were taken on this movie set. Why? Because rather than hiring an experienced armorer to work his film, PRODUCER Alec Baldwin hired a twenty-something young woman with no formal training in props, firearms or weapons of any kind. Worse yet, because filming was being done in the middle of COVID, even MORE of the standard safety procedures were ignored in deference to the set rules imposed for COVID.
I watrched the video. The Prop Master never mentioned the actor. He laid the blame squarely on the Armorer, who loaded the revolver and then left it unattended on a cart with two other guns, and on the Assistant Director, who is supposed to check each bullet to make sure it’s a dummy, but obviously didn’t. Dummy rounds are actually filled with BBs, so that they rattle when shaken. Let me repeat, the professional Prop Master never mentioned the actor.
I didn’t watch the video. Here’s what applies to Baldwin’s situation and what he should have adhered to instead of Hollywood practices.
1. Treat every gun as if it were loaded.
2. Always keep guns pointed in safe direction
3. Keep finger off trigger until target is in sights.
4. Be sure of your target and objects behind it.
Which of these practices did Baldwin obey? None.
He appeared in another podcast that I saw (which is how I found his channel) where he speaks more at length about the incident. In that video, he describes the mistakes that Baldwin himself made, including not verifying the state of the weapon for himself. While he wouldn’t comment on the potential criminality of what happened (saying he’d leave that to the lawyers to work out), he did say that standard safety practices were ignored by everyone, including Baldwin.
As a gun safety instructor, I routinely verify whether a gun that I pick up or is handed to me is empty or loaded. It’s a simple task that doesn’t take a lot of effort to execute. Now, if I were handed a gun that is intentionally loaded with ammunition that looks realistic but isn’t, suddenly the job requires much more contemplation. And if the gun is single-action, I can’t just pop a magazine and check a chamber, or flip a cylinder out and inspect the front and rear of all the rounds — I have to manually remove each round one at a time through a single opening, inspect it, and replace it, then rotate the cylinder to same position the armorer left it. If done with the requisite attention, that’s far from a quick check. And “the NRA rules” say this should be done whenever the gun changes hands. Which begs the question — what’s the point of having an armorer do “safe setup” of a gun if some actor is going to take everything she did apart and put it back together… possibly wrong?
I’m not saying any of this excuses what Baldwin did or didn’t do, I’m saying that I don’t see how any movie set can follow the standard safety rules and still function. Which leads me to believe that they… just don’t, and they wave their hands a lot to cover it up.
It leads me to believe the unions are involved and are probably prime movers of the gun safety regulations on a movie set. This is not the first time there has been a shooting death on a set, although they are few and far between. I believe every person on set who is being paid is a member of a union. I expect there is a Collective Bargaining Agreement that covers handling of guns and ammo on set. I think that is a logical assumption, but it is an assumption.
Unfortunately, in this case, many union crew members staged a walkout (over low safety standards, among other things) days before the incident, which had the side-effect of leaving less-capable workers in charge of more responsibilities, specifically including the armorer.
In the gun community, some of the more conspiracy-minded folks were suggesting the placement of the “live round” might have been the work of some union activist determined to “show the bastards” what mistakes are possible when you depend on scabs.
Can you direct me to the “actor exception” in the homicide laws?
“the Assistant Director who checked the ammo before declaring the gun cold as he handed it to Alec Baldwin.”
Which declaration has as much legal or professional authority as me diagnosing you as having beriberi. There was only one department on that set authorized to declare a gun hot or cold, and the AD (ironically apt) wasn’t part of it.
Actors rely on the armorers to tell them what is going on as most have no training in firearms (this is what sets Keanu apart as he showed up to Taran’s place and learned from an expert) The armorer here should have included basic firearms training before anything happened and the first rule is Every Firearm Is Loaded. Always, do not point at anything you are not willing to kill.
It’s been reported that the armorer DID hold a gun safety meeting for the actors… and that Baldwin insufferably made and took phone calls while he was supposed to be paying attention to it.
Gee, HenryBowman, I wonder why he copped a plea so fast. Maybe he had a bad case of beriberi and was totally confused.
“Who in the world would trust Nicholas Cage with a loaded gun? Or Nick Nolte?”
Or Mark Wahlberg, who has probably handled more guns in movies than the others combined. In his teens, in Boston, Wahlberg was convicted of the felony beating of two Vietnamese shopkeepers while stealing beer from them. According to federal law, he shouldn’t even be allowed to TOUCH a gun. But hey — laws are for the little people!
From the beginning this movie production was half-cocked.
Oddly, much safer a position than the firearm was apparently in.
I love all the comments here from people that have no knowledge of revolvers in the least. People should acquaint themselves of all of the facts leading up to this before commenting.
“You have to pull the trigger to make the gun go off”
No you do not on an original Colt clone. I have several and all of us Cowboy Action Shooters know to keep the hammer down on an empty cylinder.
Why was there live ammo on the set? Why for any fricken reason?
I’m not coming down one way or the other on this as I was not there but to just slam Baldwin because he is a loathsomely individual and a rich actor is not right.
Should he have been practicing with the gun where he was? No
Should he have checked it before fooling with it? Yes
Should he have expected that live rounds were on the set? No and why would anyone?
Can you tell me what could cause the gun to fire without pulling the trigger in this scenario?
The gun is held in the hand, cocked and pointed as though for shooting, and it fires. Not dropped. Not struck.
Are you envisioning a scenario where he partially pulls the hammer back, it slips from his thumb, and fires?
“but to just slam Baldwin because he is a loathsomely individual and a rich actor is not right.”
However, to slam Baldwin for being the virtue-signaling director of a national gun “safety” organization (“safety” as the term has been abused by his fellow travelers), and then violating every singe rule of actual “gun safety” at once (except possibly “never use alcohol, or drugs before or while shooting”) — why, thats eminently permissible.
The FBI tested the gun and found that it wouldn’t shoot unless the trigger was pulled I think it is a modern reproduction and has a modern trigger that doesn’t fire unless the trigger is pulled.