Rust and Related Lawsuits

[andersweinstein]

Wacky moment in the armorer trial today when defense firearms expert, a crotchety old banker who came by his expertise through war reenactments and collecting, swings one of his demo weapons around and gets admonished by the judge: "everybody's nervous because you have not demonstrated to us that they are unloaded. So before you start showing us the weapons, make sure they're unloaded, including that one that you just touched". In the course of doing that, he actually *has the gun pointed at the judge* for a bit, so that the deputy steps in quickly to press the barrel downward. One view here:



That first weapon was asserted to be a realistic-looking non-firing replica, but still.

Also: jury was told to expect closing arguments tomorrow morning (Wednesday), so Gutierrez not expected to testify.

[andersweinstein]

Wacky moment in the armorer trial today ...

Second tweet here has his response when prosecutor asks about it:

[raison de arizona]

guilty

[RTH10260]

as above

‘Rust’ Armorer Found Guilty of Involuntary Manslaughter In Criminal Shooting Case
Hannah Gutierrez-Reed was not convicted on evidence tampering charges.

BY WINSTON CHO
March 6, 2024 3:16pm

Rust armorer Hannah Gutierrez-Reed has been found guilty of involuntary manslaughter over the accidental shooting death of cinematographer Halyna Hutchins.

But in a split verdict, a 12-member jury in Santa Fe declined on Wednesday to convict her on evidence tampering charges. Jurors returned the decision after less than three hours of deliberating.

The 26-year-old Arizona woman faces up to 18 months in prison for her role in the death of Hutchins. She was remanded into custody after the verdict was read.



https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/ ... 235844948/

[andersweinstein]

A juror speaks:

[andersweinstein]

Gutierrez has filed an emergency motion for a new trial (also request for release) based on a new NM Supreme Court decision which reversed a conviction and remanded for new trial because of use of "a single 'and/or' to separate and connect no fewer than 4 distinct propositions" in the jury instructions, which the court found likely to produce confusion and misdirection.

The Guttierez instructions used "and/or" to connect two alternatives as shown below. I gather the problem is that jury might not be unanimous on one disjunct. Per the motion, defense objected at trial and was overruled.

[andersweinstein]

Gutierrez has filed an emergency motion for a new trial (also request for release) based on a new NM Supreme Court decision which reversed a conviction and remanded for new trial because of use of "a single 'and/or' ... I gather the problem is that jury might not be unanimous on one disjunct.

Curious, I looked into that recent NMSC decision, State v. Taylor, conveniently attached in the motion. It's a sad case of mother-daughter pair of day-care workers driving 12 kids out to a playground and forgetting two of them in cars on return, leaving the kids in a car in 95 deg NM heat for >2 hours. One died, another suffered brain damage, the pair got 36 years each for two counts of reckless child abuse. The jury instructions used "and/or" to join 3 ways they violated state guidelines plus one about leaving the kids in the car. Now they get a new trial.

NM evidently has another precedent, State v. Godoy 2012, which held that "where alternative theores of guilt are put forth under a single charge, jury unanimity is required only as to the vereict, not to any particular theory of guilt". So the possibilty of non-unanimity on any one disjunct is not in general a problem. BUT, NMSC found, Godoy was inapplicable in Taylor, because not all of the disjuncts in those instructions were legally sufficient for conviction. For example, if jurors only agreed that defendants violated state guidelines in driving the kids to a playground, that would not be sufficient for reckless child abuse.

But that's not the situation in the Gutierrez instructions. So it looks to me like her case can be distinguished (and rationale for distinguishing is already included in the motion!), Godoy will apply and say there's no problem, so this is likely to get no traction.

[RVInit]

As for the gun Baldwin was holding when it "went off". The FBI test examiner said that particular gun had a trigger pull weight of 2.5 pounds. A typical Colt 45 would have between 12 and 16 pound trigger pull. There were three Colt 45 and the one with the hair trigger was the one that was supplied to Baldwin for the closeup work that was being done on the day of the shooting.

Lots of things went wrong that day. The camera crew waited until 6:30 AM to quit. They knew they had important work to do and thought they would put the Line Producer in a bind and she would relent. New Mexico laws provide that if a crew member lives within 60 miles of the set, the production company does not have to supply them with a hotel room. On their email where they gave their ultimatum they said they would stay on the job if hotel rooms were supplied to a handful of camera crew that did not qualify for hotel rooms based on the contracts they signed. Go figure. Much is being made that they "complained about safety" however, they never specified in the letter anything staying on the job if safety meetings were initiated or anything else having to do with safety. Their only demand for staying on the job was hotel rooms for several crew members.

When the crew walked off, they took the "Video Village" with them because the equipment belonged to several of the crew that walked off the job. Video Village is a tent that contains monitors so the Director and Cinematographer can watch all camera angles at the same time and direct actors and camera crew from inside Video Village. So, they would not even have been inside that church for the blocking that the cinematographer was doing with Baldwin for that closeup work had most of the camera crew not walked off the job that morning.

This scene was being directed by the cinematographer because she had some really artistic ideas about how she wanted to "shoot" that scene. Baldwin's character was supposed to be half dead, where the audience believed he was too hurt to fight it out with the sheriffs. So, the scene was supposed to be a super closeup of Baldwin Slumped over and then suddenly pulling out the gun and pulling back the hammer. Then they would cut and then do the next scene with blanks. The cinematographer was working with him on that with the sunlight streaming through the church windows hitting the gun just right, she was very "into" her art and really wanted that scene to be something special not just a run of the mill guy pulling out a gun and pulling back the hammer. So, she was working with him to where to point it, how low, high, left, right,etc. Because it was a closeup they had to have dummy rounds in the gun and Baldwin had to have his finger inside the trigger guard even though they would call "cut" without him actually firing the gun. She was trying to get her vision of the perfect way to film that on camera. So, that was what they were doing, and the third time through he was putting the hammer back down and it went off (according to him and a couple others who were in the church)

The prosecution's expert on reproduction Colt 45 guns was asked a question that the prosecutor did not already know the answer to. She asked him if there is any way the gun could have gone off without Baldwin first pulling back the hammer and then pulling the trigger. At first the guy said "yes", then he quickly said "well, actually those two events could happen in the reverse order. So, if someone had simply pulled on the trigger enough to "set it", (like while loading the gun or messing with it) and then handed the gun to someone else and that person pulled back the hammer, the gun would go off when that person tried to release the hammer. It's an idiosyncrasy of those reproduction Colt 45 guns." I bet she is going to be sorry she asked that question as I'm sure Baldwin's lawyers were watching that entire trial. Given the fact that gun had such a light trigger pull I can see how someone could have moved the trigger enough, even if it wasn't Baldwin himself. That gun was first emptied and then Halls and Hannah checked the barrel for obstructions. Then she loaded it and they both half assed checked it again. With all the messing about I can see where the trigger could have been set prior to Baldwin even receiving the gun. Multiple people said they did not believe he pulled the trigger, he was not the only person to say that.

Back to the people who quit:

Prior to any threat to quit someone on set had mentioned one safety issue to the Line Producer and she had a meeting with Reed to help her establish protocols to fix that problem. So all the bullshit that "the producers" knew about safety issues and didn't do anything was complete BS - the only reported issue was addressed by the Line Producer. Reed did not follow through on that stuff, but nobody reported that to the Line Producer or any other producer. Also, the two firearms issues prior to Baldwin's issue were deliberately kept secret by Halls, Sarah, and the stunt man who had one of the issues, due to their knowledge that the Line Producer on Rust had a reputation for firing people for misfires and other issues involving guns. A couple of people who are suing Baldwin said they also saw safety issues involving guns but when asked by Reed's lawyers if they reported any of those to any of the producers, and particularly the Line Producer as she is the point person for "HR" related issues, they all admitted they did not report anything to anyone.

[RVInit]

[Tiredretiredlawyer]

Thanks so much to the Fogbow’s very own intrepid investigative reporter- RV!

[Tiredretiredlawyer]

Hubby found this for us.

[andersweinstein]

Hubby found this for us.

Fascinating. I'm no expert, but from what I've picked up watching this case, a couple of details must be different in the replica vintage long Colts in the Rust shooting. For one thing, I know the cylinder on the Rust guns doesn't swivel out -- that's relevant because it means it is not quite as easy to check the load in those guns. And there are I believe 3 points at which the hammer locks: safety, half-cock, and full-cock. One has to pull the hammer to the half-cock position to allow the cylinder to spin. In that position one can open the loading gate to load one chamber at a time, or (if simply verifying it is empty) inspect the chambers from the outside while rotating the cylinder to be sure to look at all of them . One can then pull the hammer further to the full cock position, at which point a trigger pull is required to release it and fire.

One speculation I've seen is that Baldwin may unknowingly have had enough pressure on the trigger (only two pounds required) to prevent it locking at the full-cock position, so that it would release and fire as soon as he let the hammer go. Then he could believe he didn't pull the trigger, but the gun could fire as he described.

[andersweinstein]

The prosecution's expert on reproduction Colt 45 guns was asked a question that the prosecutor did not already know the answer to. She asked him if there is any way the gun could have gone off without Baldwin first pulling back the hammer and then pulling the trigger. At first the guy said "yes", then he quickly said "well, actually those two events could happen in the reverse order. So, if someone had simply pulled on the trigger enough to "set it", (like while loading the gun or messing with it) and then handed the gun to someone else and that person pulled back the hammer, the gun would go off when that person tried to release the hammer. It's an idiosyncrasy of those reproduction Colt 45 guns." I bet she is going to be sorry she asked that question as I'm sure Baldwin's lawyers were watching that entire trial. Given the fact that gun had such a light trigger pull I can see how someone could have moved the trigger enough, even if it wasn't Baldwin himself. That gun was first emptied and then Halls and Hannah checked the barrel for obstructions. Then she loaded it and they both half assed checked it again. With all the messing about I can see where the trigger could have been set prior to Baldwin even receiving the gun. Multiple people said they did not believe he pulled the trigger, he was not the only person to say that.

I'd be very interested to know which expert gave the testimony described. I only saw portions of the trial, but the idea that someone *else* could hand the gun to Baldwin in a "set" position such that it would go off after cocking and releasing is new to me.

I do know that prosecution expert Lucian Haag testified that the trigger had to be "pulled or already depressed" to fire:

“I think it [is] your conclusion that the Baldwin revolver that you examined, in your expert opinion – that the shooter had to have fully cocked that weapon and pulled the trigger to fire it?” Lewis asked.

“Either fully pulled the trigger, or already depressed it,” Haag said. “If he’d already depressed it, the very instant he let go of the hammer, it would fire.”
https://www.thewrap.com/rust-trial-gun-expert-functioning-fire-if-cocked-trigger-alec-baldwin/

But that refers to it being depressed by operator before or during process of pulling back the hammer.

[andersweinstein]

Gutierrez has filed an emergency motion for a new trial (also request for release) based on a new NM Supreme Court decision...

Motion denied following a brief video hearing:

‘Rust’ Armorer to Stay in Jail as Lawyers Appeal Verdict in Alec Baldwin Shooting
Hannah Gutierrez Reed, the armorer on the Alec Baldwin film “Rust,” will remain in jail while her lawyers appeal her conviction in the death of the film’s cinematographer.
A Santa Fe judge denied a defense request for release on Friday, and refused to order a new trial in the case.
“Keep in mind there was a death that the jury determined was caused by her,” said Judge Mary Marlowe Sommer. “So I am not releasing her.”
Gutierrez Reed is scheduled to be sentenced on April 15, and faces up to 18 months in prison.

Full article

[RVInit]

Thanks so much to the Fogbow’s very own intrepid investigative reporter- RV!

It's a matter of finding videos of the right length to listen to on my headphones while completing the mostly mindless tasks I do for mom. Fortunately or unfortunately these darn legal cases almost always fit the bill. But, I am also becoming educated in many other pretty interesting areas that we just happen to not have topics on and I'm not in front of the computer much of the time so I don't bother to start any or contribute to areas unless there is already a topic. It kind of skews or misrepresents how I'm actually spending most of my time. But...happy to be of service anyway, in some small measure!

[Sam the Centipede]

But, I am also becoming educated in many other pretty interesting areas that we just happen to not have topics on and I'm not in front of the computer much of the time so I don't bother to start any or contribute to areas unless there is already a topic.

♫ ♪ ♫ ♪ ♫ ♪
There's a hole in our forum, dear reader, dear reader,
There's a hole in our forum, dear reader, a hole.

Then fill it, dear RV, dear RV, dear RV,
Then fill it, dear RV, dear RV, fill it.

With what shall I fill it, dear reader, dear reader?
With what shall I fill it, dear reader, with what?

With a topic, dear RV, dear RV, dear RV,
With a topic, dear RV, dear RV, with a topic.

But the topic is missing, dear reader, dear reader, dear reader,
The topic is missing, dear reader, dear reader, missing.

The create it, dear RV, dear RV, dear RV,
The create it, dear RV, dear RV, create it.

But the topic is unnamed, dear reader, dear reader, dear reader,
The topic is unnamed, dear reader, dear reader, unnamed.

The name it, dear RV, dear RV, dear RV,
The name it, dear RV, dear RV, name it.

How shall I name it, dear reader, dear reader, dear reader,
How shall I name it, dear reader, dear reader, name it.

At this point I decided the message is probably clear enough!

If you're interested in something, it's very likely that others here would like to read about it. Even if they don't know that yet.

[RVInit]

Off Topic

Ok, so later today I will go through my YouTube history and pick out a few things. I do have a feeling there is probably some interest out there for some of it! Or, there might be topics already, but I have a hard time finding them. I do enjoy some of the creative topic headlines but sometimes it does make it hard for me to find the right one if it's a topic I haven't seen already.

[andersweinstein]

Prosecutors have filed a response to team Baldwin's motion to dismiss. Spicy start:

The defendant's motion to dismiss is a predictably false, misleading, and histrionic misrepresentation of the facts and circumstances of the history of the case. The two special prosecutors who have been assigned the prosecution of Mr. Baldwin have experienced near countless lies and manipulation from the defense for more than one year. In addition, we have, and certainly will continue to be, the subject of the defendant's contrived and unwarranted personal attacks. The primary goal of Mr. Baldwin and his counsel, which now numbers eight total attorneys: ... (list omitted) ... is to ensure that the case is not heard on its merits, and if it is heard on its merits, to discredit the prosecution, investigation, and witnesses in the media so that a conviction becomes unlikely for reasons that have nothing to do with Mr. Baldwin's criminal culpability.

Narrative also hits him on his role as producer:

In addition to rushing the cast and crew, Mr. Baldwin was frequently screaming and cursing at himself, at crew members or at no one and not for any particular reason. To watch Mr. Baldwin's conduct on the set of Rust is to witness a man who has absolutely no control of his own emotions and absolutely no concern for how his conduct effects [sic] those around him. Witnesses have testified that it was this exact conduct that contributed to safety compromises on set.

Many other details about their case, including hammering inconsistencies between his police statement and Stephanopoulos interview.

[chancery]

Rust armorer receives an 18-month sentence.

Not a big fan of long sentences, and I haven't been following the trial, but that seems light.

Edit: I suppose one consideration, could be that she'll never serve as an armorer again (if that's true, but it seems likely).

[andersweinstein]

Rust armorer receives an 18-month sentence.

Not a big fan of long sentences, and I haven't been following the trial, but that seems light.

Edit: I suppose one consideration, could be that she'll never serve as an armorer again (if that's true, but it seems likely).

Well that was the maximum sentence possible. Her offense was also given a categorization as a Serious Violent Offense which limits the amount of credit she can receive (if I recall it means she must serve 85%). Given some people were suggesting probation after time served, this consitutes throwing the book at her in this case. On any sentence her career as armorer was over.

I believe she was pretty seriously hurt by recorded jailhouse phone calls while awaiting sentencing which prosecution quoted in their response to defense's sentencing memo to show complete lack of remorse (and called prosecutor a "bitch" and jurors "retards") Judge gave a stern rebuke and quoted some of them. I don't know why she wasn't advised about that by her lawyers. In one the paralegal she's talking to even raised the possibility ("I don't trust Kari to not be recording these calls. I don't trust that bitch").

[Edited to add link]

[raison de arizona]

I agree, the complete lack of remorse is what the judge commented on in sentencing her to the max.

Judge Mary Marlowe Sommer:

"In your allocution you said you were sorry but not … sorry for what you did," Marlowe Sommer said. "It was your attorney that had to tell the court that you were remorseful.

"The word remorse: a deep regret coming from a sense of guilt for past wrongs," she continued. "That's not you."

https://www.usatoday.com/story/entertai ... 325809007/

[andersweinstein]

Clip in this tweet has the judge's tongue-lashing.

[Tiredretiredlawyer]

Well played, Judge!

[raison de arizona]

Thx for the clip!

[Tiredretiredlawyer]

Full clip of judge's ruling. She breaks down her three choices in sentencing. https://www.courttv.com/news/hannah-gut ... -shooting/

Hannah Gutierrez receives maximum sentence for ‘Rust’ shooting

Judge Sommer’s designation of the conviction as a “violent offense” means that Gutierrez’s sentence can only be reduced by 4 days per month, compared to a non-violent offense in which she could have potentially received a deduction of up to 30 days per month.

WATCH: Hannah Gutierrez Says She’s Not a ‘Monster,’ She’s ‘Human’ at Sentencing

In sentencing Gutierrez to the maximum sentence, Judge Sommer found that she had time to check the rounds before loading them into Alec Baldwin’s gun, but did not. The judge referenced Gutierrez’s statements made in jail calls, where she said she, ‘did not have to check all the dummy rounds.”

The judge also noted that she appeared more concerned about herself than her role in causing the death of Halyna Hutchins.

“Hannah is dismissive about someone dying,” said Judge Sommer. “Hannah said, ‘People have accidents, people die.’”

The judge found that giving her probation would be, “giving you a pass that you do not deserve.”

The judge found no remorse in the statement Gutierrez made to the court. She stated, “Her heart aches for the family of Halyna Hutchins.”

“You were sorry, but not sorry for what you did,” chastised the judge. “It was your attorney who had to tell the court that you were sorry.”

Actor Alec Baldwin, who fired the fatal shot, is facing the same charges as Gutierrez and is scheduled to stand trial in July.