What Will Make or Break Alec Baldwin’s Manslaughter Case

[Source: News Nation]

Celebrity lawyer Christopher C. Melcher, who is ranked as a best family law attorney in California, explains what will make or break Alec Baldwin‘s involuntary manslaughter trial on News Nation.

Host: Let’s start with Alec. Baldwin, right? The trial may be light years away from your average involuntary manslaughter case, but if you were expecting days and days of painstaking for dear potential jury members, lawyers grilling them on what they know about the famous actor, my friends, think again because it took less than a day to seat 12 jurors and four alternates, and the openings are on track for tomorrow.. I know, lightning fast. Judge says that this trial should last more than a week. I don’t know what that means because more than a week could be a year, but I’m assuming maybe a little more than a week.

Here he was arriving. I was surprised. Thought he looked pretty good, got a haircut. If you think Alec Baldwin is going to be the star attraction, though, you’re only half right. Maybe not even half. Because center stage almost surely is going to belong to a gun, not just any gun. The colt 45 reproduction revolver that fired the deadly round that killed Halyna Hutchins, the cinematographer on his film. I didn’t know this part. Halyna is just the second person to die on a movie set. Brandon Lee was the first, and that was back in 1993. This shooting happened in 2021, and it happened on the set of Alec Baldwin’s film, Rust. And the gun in question is called a Peacemaker. I know it’s been weird. But the Peacemaker has a really big history in Hollywood. In fact, you cannot make a Western without a Peacemaker.

What Happened in Rust Shootings

Host:…But this is the scene here. This movie set here, Rust. Halyna was only the second shot and killed on a movie set. Alec Baldwin had that gun, the Peacemaker in his holster on the afternoon of October 21st, 2021. They were doing a rehearsal in that mock church on the set. He was setting up all the camera angles with the cinematographer when he drew his gun like that. He says he thought it was safe. The witnesses say that the assistant director called out, “Cold gun,” just before handing it to Alec. If you know what movie lingo is, cold gun means empty or loaded with blanks. But Alec’s gun went off and it wasn’t empty and it wasn’t loaded with blanks. There was a live round in that chamber and it hit Halyna Hutchins in the chest, and it also wounded the film’s director Joel Souza. Take a look.

After the shooting, five additional live rounds were found on the set of Rust, on a prop cart and in the gun belt that was actually assigned to Alec Baldwin. Of course, there should have been zero, zero live rounds on a movie set, right? The movie’s armorer, person who handles the guns and the ammo, et cetera, that’s Hannah Gutierrez, she was convicted of the same charge that Alec Baldwin is facing right now. She was sentenced to 18 months in prison. Baldwin’s trial is likely going to turn on whether or not Alec Baldwin pulled the trigger. I know. How does the gun go off if you don’t pull the trigger? The prosecutors say that same thing. He must have. But the actor, he insists he didn’t.

The FBI Destroyed the Gun

Host:…The prosecutors are going to be asking a lot more questions than Chris or George or me or anybody else, including why Baldwin allegedly failed to demand safety checks between himself and the armorer before rehearsal, and why he allegedly failed to show up for some of that mandatory gun training that every actor who handles a gun has to do on a movie set. It’s just part of the deal, right? They’re also going to point out the FBI and the conclusion that the FBI made that that gun could not possibly have fired without the trigger being pulled. But here too is a bit of a plot twist. In the process of the FBI testing the gun to make that conclusion, the FBI wrecked it.

They destroyed the gun, they destroyed the Peacemaker. So that led to a defense motion to say, case dismissed, judge, the FBI destroyed the Peacemaker, the key piece of evidence in the case. And the judge denied that motion. So when the curtain goes up tomorrow, it is a full-on gunfight between the lawyers. So I’m going to stop here and bring in a lawyer, a good one. He’s not only a top family law attorney in California, but he knows all about celebrity law as well as being a legal analyst. It’s Chris Melcher. What do you think is going to make or break this case?

Legal Analyst Explains Jury Traits

Chris: Well, Ashley, I think it comes down to jurors who grew up using guns, and there were a few of them who identified themselves in jury selection. And people who have experience with guns like I did growing up, the first rule is treat all guns as being loaded. And I’ve known people who have been killed by guns that were supposedly unloaded by violating that rule, and it would’ve only taken seconds. So somebody who knows about guns would never accept someone else’s word for that being loaded. And people who don’t have experience with guns would find it probably okay for Alec to accept this weapon, point it to people without ever verifying whether that thing was loaded. This was not a toy gun or a prop, it’s a real gun.

Host:

So tell you what, do this for me. Put on another hat and be a celebrity attorney that deals with actors, motion pictures. That’s the not real world. Is it possible to convince this jury that likely in New Mexico maybe thick in gun culture, many of them may be gun owners and gun enthusiasts, is it possible to convince them this isn’t the same as the real world, we have props and there’s never a real bullet on any set, let alone in a gun. Is it possible to convince them that cold gun is the next best thing to this prop is not only a prop, it’ll never have a bullet in it because we don’t do that in this business.

Actors Rely on Armorers

Chris:

Absolutely. And there’s supposedly a professional on set. Hannah Gutierrez-Reed was the armorer, and she was the one who was supposed to be taking charge of these guns and making sure that they were safe. So definitely an argument, a good argument could be made that Alec Baldwin is an actor who can rely upon another professional, an armorer, and making sure that this was safe. And just like if there was going to be an explosion on the scene, he’s not expected to go through and look at all the pyrotechnics and understand it. A gun would be the same. That’s the winning argument if believed by the jury.

Host:

Okay, next question. The jury. Apparently the makeup is 11 women and five men. Obviously some of those are alternates, but there’s a lot more women than men. And Alec Baldwin during his career has been considered a bit of a heartthrob. Does it make a lick of difference whether it’s a bunch of ladies and a handsome Hollywood actor?

If Alec Baldwin Testifies

Chris:

Well, it could, particularly if he testifies. And I imagine he will. He did give these interviews, and I imagine that was against advice of counsel, and I kind of think he’ll want to testify and explain. And that’s really the only way he can convey how damaging this has been to him, because certainly he had no intention on hurting anyone, and he’s got to be just devastated by this thing, and that’s his opportunity to explain it. But he is going to be cross-examined then on a few inconsistencies. So I don’t really think the makeup is going to make a difference.

Baldwin’s Family Man Public Persona

Host:

Well, maybe. Look at the pictures that we’re showing right now. He showed up with Hilaria, his wife, and they have seven kids that just over a decade have been married. They’ve got seven kids and they’ve got the eighteen-month-old there. Now we got all those women on the jury, 11 women, does it make a difference that he’s showing up with one of the babies and I don’t know, maybe he’ll show up with more in the days to come?

Chris:

Well, we don’t know if the jurors are witnessing this or watching the coverage. They’re not supposed to. But I kind of thought it was a little weird why I only bring one baby? Hilaria passed the baby back to the nanny. Why did the baby have to be there in the first place? So you never know how these things are interpreted. Could a juror see this and think that it was staged? So you have to be very, very careful with jurors.