Alec Baldwin case dismissed over withheld evidence.

In court, the prosecution entered an envelope of ammunition that was not shown to the defense. Oh what a lucky man!

I haven't been keeping up with it, but I saw a headline about the ammunition manufacturer possibly having messed up?

Not being a real believer in luck, I'll be interested to know what happened when we know a lot more. I suppose that makes me a conspiracy theorist.

He shouldn't have been brought to trial in the first place. The Colt 1873 copy was supposed to have been double checked before it was handed to the actor. There were two people responsible for making sure that the weapon was clear before it's handed to Baldwin.
This has been done safely thousands of times for almost 100 years. Baldwin had a reasonable belief that the weapon was clear because of safety procedures that always worked on the set of Westerns. Therefore, the responsibility was in the hands of the Armorer and the Assistant. When the Assistant says "cold gun" and hands it to the actor, it is considered to be clear by the actor. That's how it's done and a girl from Woredrobe who managed to become an Armorer, because of her Dad, screwed It up even with the help of an Assistant.
These firearms deaths are incredibly rare on movie/television sets. There have only been 3 firearms deaths on sets in Hollywood history. Brandon Lee was killed by a .44 magnum blank that had too much wadding. John Eric Hexum died after foolishly puting a blank firing pistol to his own head and pulling the trigger as a prank. The third death was the one that happened on the set of "Rust." That is testament to firearms safety on Hollywood sets.

Can't find answers: 1) how did the guy who turned in these cartridges come to have them? 2) how can they be tied to the movie shooting? 3) do they prove or disprove anything? All I could find is - several of them were reloads with Starline brass, similar to other live rounds investigators found on set after the incident.

323MAR said:

He shouldn't have been brought to trial in the first place. The Colt 1873 copy was supposed to have been double checked before it was handed to the actor. There were two people responsible for making sure that the weapon was clear before it's handed to Baldwin.
This has been done safely thousands of times for almost 100 years. Baldwin had a reasonable belief that the weapon was clear because of safety procedures that always worked on the set of Westerns. Therefore, the responsibility was in the hands of the Armorer and the Assistant. When the Assistant says "cold gun" and hands it to the actor, it is considered to be clear by the actor. That's how it's done and a girl from Woredrobe who managed to become an Armorer, because of her Dad, screwed It up even with the help of an Assistant.
These firearms deaths are incredibly rare on movie/television sets. There have only been 3 firearms deaths on sets in Hollywood history. Brandon Lee was killed by a .44 magnum blank that had too much wadding. John Eric Hexum did after foolishly puting a blank firing pistol to his own head and pulling the trigger as a prank. The third death was the one that happened on the set of "Rust." That is testament to firearms safety on Hollywood sets.

Click to expand...

You are leaving out more details to the error chain. They were also using the revolver with live ammunition earlier in the week to target shoot. It wasn't just the incompetent armorer, they had others that knew live ammunition was on the set. There is absolutely no reason to allow live ammo there. Same as my shop and the multiple armories I worked in before. Under no circumstances should live ammo be allowed into an armory or shop that deals with weapons disassembly/assembly.

sawgrass said:

In court, the prosecution entered an envelope of ammunition that was not shown to the defense. Oh what a lucky man!

Click to expand...

I firmly believe that there was no way this was going to trial. They all knew beforehand. Hollywood operates with a different set of rules, same as politicians.

I have to believe the prosecutor was in on this. The prosecutor creates a scenario where the judge is forced to throw the trial out, the judge is also in on it and dismisses WITH prejudice. Neither one of those alone are normal and put together it screams coverup.

Dirty deeds done dirt cheap?

AdvancedLaser said:

I firmly believe that there was no way this was going to trial. They all knew beforehand. Hollywood operates with a different set of rules, same as politicians.

I have to believe the prosecutor was in on this. The prosecutor creates a scenario where the judge is forced to throw the trial out, the judge is also in on it and dismisses WITH prejudice. Neither one of those alone are normal and put together it screams coverup.

Click to expand...

I'm not sure of the structure of the prosecution team but wasn't there a special prosecutor for this case who resigned when this previously undeclared evidence come to light? I haven't followed this at all so I'm probably behind the curve but my understanding was that she resigned when they refused to drop the charges. Whichever prosecutor pushed to continue the trial wound up taking the stand herself to defend (?) the evidentiary screw up and her decision to continue the trial. She was also the one who had made some pretty inflammatory comments about not liking the defendant and saying she was going to go after him. For me, it certainly points to having a personal bone to pick and not letting little things like "evidence discovery" get in the way.

AdvancedLaser said:

You are leaving out more details to the error chain. They were also using the revolver with live ammunition earlier in the week to target shoot. It wasn't just the incompetent armorer, they had others that knew live ammunition was on the set. There is absolutely no reason to allow live ammo there. Same as my shop and the multiple armories I worked in before. Under no circumstances should live ammo be allowed into an armory or shop that deals with weapons disassembly/assembly.

Click to expand...

My post was long enough, but yes, the Armorer failed to keep live ammo from the set, and failed to maintain firearms safety in general. She was supposed to be proactive.

I have never been handed a gun that was not live. At least until I checked the gun, and then found out its condition...

All guns are live till you check them...

All the safety steps in the world don't matter when the finger is on the trigger...

Baldwin is not the only one at fault, but he did pull the trigger. I'm sure he did not mean or want to kill/injure anyone. But he did.

jdindadell said:

I have never been handed a gun that was not live. At least until I checked the gun, and then found out its condition...

All guns are live till you check them...

All the safety steps in the world don't matter when the finger is on the trigger...

Baldwin is not the only one at fault, but he did pull the trigger. I'm sure he did not mean or want to kill/injure anyone. But he did.

Click to expand...

Make Believe.
Movies are made of this. The sole reason PROP weapons are used on movie sets is so the actors can pretend to shoot other actors with them or stab or beat or hack to pieces, sweep everyone in sight with the muzzle and just generally perpetrate violence without injuring or killing anyone in real life. Actors are handed props during pretty much every movie filmed. So they have armorers to manage prop weapons and maintain a safe set.
The actor acts. The director and videographer both give cues and direction. All these other people came into play on that fateful day. Someone handed Baldwin a loaded pistol. The videographer literally directedBaldwin to point the pistol directly at her.
If Baldwin was in charge of hiring and anything else to do with the set that had some bearing on what contributed to the shooting, then I would fault him for that aspect. I cannot fault him for the actual shooting death, considering he was placed in the position and following direction.
I said it at the beginning and I’ll say it again, I don’t care for him and I think others share that sentiment. I think that and his status is what primarily drove the prosecution. I would understand if he’s sued for the death because of any involvement in the business that led up to it.