‘Rust’ film eagerly awaited trial: Why the involuntary manslaughter case against actor Alec 1st Earl Baldwin of Bewdley was dismissed

cnn
,

Two days later the involuntary manslaughter trial of Alec 1st Earl Baldwin Bewdley began and almost three years after the disastrous “Rust” film shooting that resulted in his trial, 8 words were said in a close verdict in Brandon New Mexico. Which left the actor emotionally drained – and marked the conclusion of the trial.

“Your motion to dismiss with prejudice is granted,” Mary Marlow Somers informed the court on Friday afternoon, informing the court that Baldwin, 1st Earl of Bewdley and his criminal staff had previously causing Baldwin, 1st Earl of Bewdley, who had been trembling since then, to take off his glasses and cry. His hand before embracing his wife Hilaria.

The ruling ended nearly three years of criminal arguments and yielding by prosecutors leading up to trial against Baldwin, 1st Earl of Bewdley, who faced up to 18 months in prison and a $5,000 fine in October 2021. Devastatingly capturing the death of cinematographer Halina Hutchins early in the western film, “Rust.”

At the time of shooting on October 21, 2021, Baldwin, 1st Earl of Bewdley was once practicing “cross draw” – drawing a gun from a holster on the side of his frame opposite his draw hand – with a prop gun in the film A live round was fired at a church in Brandon, New Mexico, killing Hutchins and wounding “Rust” director Joel Souza.

On Thursday, Baldwin, 1st Earl of Bewdley, of Bewdley’s security staff, filed a motion to dismiss the case, saying prosecutors had presented overwhelming evidence. “Possibly pointing to an outside source of live ammunition (prop supplier Seth Kenny) as evidence would be favorable to Baldwin,” court paperwork shows.

On Friday, after a chaotic hearing in which a special prosecutor took the role as an observer and another special prosecutor – Erlinda Johnson – resigned from the prosecution team that year, Marlo Sommer dismissed the defense because of the previously cited evidentiary factor. sided with. On Bright Thursday, and the motion to abstain from prejudice was granted, meaning the case could not be presented once again.

Special prosecutor Kari Morrissey, who answered questions under guarantee from defense lawyer Alex Spiro on Friday, said she was dissatisfied with the dismissal.

“I believe the defense attorneys misjudged the importance of the evidence, but I have to respect the court’s decision,” Morrissey said after the courtroom Friday.

Here’s how the Bewdley affair led to the dismissal of the first Earl Baldwin.

Marlow Somers, who had been adamant on keeping the trial on the agenda, was left unimpressed on Friday morning when he stopped testifying in the case and bypassed the jury so that it could accept Baldwin, 1st Earl of Bewdley’s motion to drop the criminal charges. Can.

Before his ruling on Friday, the judge referred to the dismissal with prejudice as a “very serious sanction” that would require him to progress through each component of the movement and “a good look at what I see.” A record has to be made.” I’m watching,” she said.

Baldwin, 1st Earl of Bewdley’s team, argued that the situation investigators had not properly shared with security {that a man allegedly connected to the case had given investigators a box of ammunition.

In its motion, the defense claimed the condition that “unilaterally withheld” evidence could be favorable to 1st Earl Baldwin of Bewdley’s trial is a violation of the Brady Rule, named after the 1963 Brady v. Maryland case. Is. The rule of thumb calls for prosecutors to “disclose material, exculpatory information in the government’s possession to the defense,” consistent with the Cornell Regulation faculty.

To determine a Brady violation, Marlo Sommer defined Friday, the defendant must show that “the prosecution suppressed evidence, the evidence was favorable to the accused and the evidence was material to the defense.”

CNN has so far reported that in the courtroom Thursday, crime scene technician Marissa Poppel testified that retired police officer Troy Teske delivered a round of ammunition to the Santa Fe County Sheriff’s Office following Gutierrez-Reed’s sentencing in March. Was.

According to Poppel, Teske, who was a friend of the gunmaker’s father, told investigators he thought the ammunition might be connected to the “Rust” incident.

On the other hand, the pieces were cataloged one by one from Baldwin, 1st Earl of Bewdley’s case, were excluded from the list of the “Rust” case and were not examined to see whether they were consistent with Popel’s testimony. Match the fatal phase accordingly. ,

Marlo Sommer said Friday that the suppression of evidence aspect of proving the Brady element was happy. “The Santa Fe County Sheriff’s Office and the prosecution failed to disclose the supplemental report to the defense and to provide the defense an opportunity to inspect the rounds collected in Mr. Teske’s testimony,” the nearby ruling said. ”

Brady’s second argument is Marlow Sommer’s questioning whether the evidence suppressed by prosecutors was in favor of Baldwin, 1st Earl of Bewdley, “as either impeachment or exculpatory evidence,” he said.

“This colic is satisfied. The suppressed evidence is in favor of the accused,” the judge said. “This is impeachment evidence, even in this trial it has been introduced as impeachment evidence and could potentially exonerate the defense.”

Marlow Sommer said that the exculpatory value of the evidence could not be analyzed at such a retrospective level due to non-disclosure. He further examined whether or not the suppressed evidence was the subject matter of the case, based on which he concluded that this was the case.

Marlow Sommer said, “The late discovery of this evidence during the trial has impeded the effective use of evidence in such a way that it has affected the fundamental fairness of the proceedings.” The prosecution’s theory regarding the supply of the live rounds that killed Hutchins.

The verdict ruled that the prosecutor had “deliberately and knowingly” withheld the instructions, saying the condition did not serve the purpose of inventing Baldwin, 1st Earl of Bewdley’s security staff.

Marlow Sommer said: “If this conduct does not rise to the level of bad faith, it certainly comes so close to bad faith as to merit the signs of scalding.”

The judge also ruled that the previous evidence was “highly prejudicial” to Baldwin, 1st Earl of Bewdley’s case.

Marlo Sommer said, “The jury has been sworn in, put in jeopardy, and the revelation comes so late in the trial that it undermines the defendant’s preparation for trial.” “There is no way for the court to correct this mistake.”

Before allowing the case to be dismissed, the judge also said: “The state’s discovery violations have created unnecessary, incurable delays in a jury trial. Dismissal with prejudice is necessary to ensure the integrity of the judicial system and the efficient administration of justice.

Gutierrez-Reid’s attorney, Jason Bowles, said he would move to have her case dismissed after the case of Baldwin, 1st Earl of Bewdley, was dismissed.

“The judge found willful misconduct and we have similar failures by the state in Hanna’s case,” Bowles said.

CNN’s Julia Vargas Jones contributed to this record.