Gun used in Alec Baldwin ‘Rust’ shooting ‘destroyed by the state,’ defense lawyer reveals

[SavannahMann]

Well this makes for interesting news.... The DA claims the weapon was not destroyed...

MSN

www.msn.com

Maybe there is hope for justice after all..

From the article.

Brewer said the firearm had sustained damage to internal components during the FBI’s functionality testing, but that it “still exists and can be used as evidence.”

It was damaged during the testing. Now it can’t be examined by defense experts to determine what flaws may have existed. It was destroyed. And any defense attorney in the nation would move to have the evidence on the weapon thrown out.

 

[westwall]

Actually. It had. Remington had an issue with their 700 rifles. The two part trigger assembly would trip the firing pin because of a design flaw without anyone touching the trigger. There were several incidents of people getting shot because of this flaw. Taurus had an issue with the safety on the Millennium Pro series of pistols. Several people were shot and some died because of this flaw.

So your statement is not exactly accurate.

If this weapon was a replica true to the era it had a firing pin on the hammer. Those were notorious for accidental discharges. Cowboys usually carried it with the hammer on an empty chamber because of that threat. The six shooter became a five shooter in the interest of safety.

Baldwin first had to cock the hammer before he could pull the trigger to shoot her.

His claim, and your argument, are meritless.

 

[Billy_Bob]

From the article.

Brewer said the firearm had sustained damage to internal components during the FBI’s functionality testing, but that it “still exists and can be used as evidence.”

It was damaged during the testing. Now it can’t be examined by defense experts to determine what flaws may have existed. It was destroyed. And any defense attorney in the nation would move to have the evidence on the weapon thrown out.

This is going to be interesting to say the least. The fact you cannot get around is the manual action which Baldwin had to make in order for it to be fireable or miss fire. He did that act without clearing the weapon. Baldwin is going to be found guilty if they follow the evidence.

 

[SavannahMann]

This is going to be interesting to say the least. The fact you cannot get around is the manual action which Baldwin had to make in order for it to be fireable or miss fire. He did that act without clearing the weapon. Baldwin is going to be found guilty if they follow the evidence.

Maybe. The evidence may be suppressed. The fact that the weapons internal workings were destroyed by the FBI during testing makes its inclusion questionable.

 

[Jarlaxle]

Baldwin alleges he did not pull the trigger so the defense should be able to have their own experts examine the weapon. Can't do that now.

And the lack of that ability may (indeed: SHOULD) result in the charges being dismissed. The fix is in!

And someone on the police department has himself a sweet cowboy revolver.

 

[Jarlaxle]

This is unbelievable! Now they are destroying guns from movie sets! why destroy it? what do they gain with that? all for show!

What a circus! idiots!

The fix is in.

The gun just went off in my hand defense has never once worked.

Except...in this case, it could, because a Peacemaker ABSOLUTELY CAN fire without touching the trigger.

More precisely an Acquittal...

Or dismissal.

Prove what? That he's legally responsible? His signature exists on every contract signed to make that movie as the executive producer. As the head honcho he contractually accepted the ultimate responsibility for what happens on set. Why is this concept eluding you so?

Do you or do you not understand the difference between civil responsibility and criminal responsibility?

Actually. It had. Remington had an issue with their 700 rifles. The two part trigger assembly would trip the firing pin because of a design flaw without anyone touching the trigger. There were several incidents of people getting shot because of this flaw. Taurus had an issue with the safety on the Millennium Pro series of pistols. Several people were shot and some died because of this flaw.

So your statement is not exactly accurate.

If this weapon was a replica true to the era it had a firing pin on the hammer. Those were notorious for accidental discharges. Cowboys usually carried it with the hammer on an empty chamber because of that threat. The six shooter became a five shooter in the interest of safety.

Spot on. I have actually seen it on an old hunting rifle-the guy loaded it, chambered a round, released the safety...and it fired. Round went into an embankment. Nobody was hurt, though I can't vouch for everyone's underwear surviving.

 

[Jarlaxle]

Baldwin first had to cock the hammer before he could pull the trigger to shoot her.

His claim, and your argument, are meritless.

That's wrong.

This is going to be interesting to say the least. The fact you cannot get around is the manual action which Baldwin had to make in order for it to be fireable or miss fire. He did that act without clearing the weapon. Baldwin is going to be found guilty if they follow the evidence.

You're not familiar with Peacemakers. Indeed: engaging the hammer safety could, if done incorrectly, cause the gun to fire.

 

[Papageorgio]

Maybe. The evidence may be suppressed. The fact that the weapons internal workings were destroyed by the FBI during testing makes its inclusion questionable.

Well let’s hope the good ole boys don’t get away with another taking of a life.

 

[SavannahMann]

Well let’s hope the good ole boys don’t get away with another taking of a life.

The Constitution guarantees that the accused has a right to challenge evidence, face accusers, have his own experts conduct tests on all evidence to offer a reasonable defense.

Not because they are rich. But because that is the system we have.

Using another recent case we can go to my many comments on the Chauvin case. I said from the beginning that Chauvin just as every other defendant had three paths to acquittal.

1) Chauvin wasn’t the person involved. This path was closed by the video and his own statements.

2) Chauvin was not responsible for the cause of death. For this Chauvin and any other defendant would need experts to testify that the cause of death was wrong, or that the evidence was misinterpreted. For that the Experts need access to all evidence to conduct their own tests.

3) the action that led to the outcome were reasonable or within policy. If you acted within the ideas of self defense. The reasonable person in that situation argument. Or for a cop, just doing what I was supposed to within policy.

I would demand this for every single defendant. I would argue for this if Hitler was the defendant. When the Government was exposed as lying and providing false statements to the court during the Bundy trial in Nevada I cheered the dismissal of all charges. Not because I agree with Bundy. I still believe he is an unequaled asshat. But because that is what is supposed to happen.

The Constitution makes it hard to convict someone. It is supposed to be hard to get a conviction. And I don’t want it any other way. I don’t care who the defendant is. I want it to be hard to convict anyone.

 

[Papageorgio]

The Constitution guarantees that the accused has a right to challenge evidence, face accusers, have his own experts conduct tests on all evidence to offer a reasonable defense.

Not because they are rich. But because that is the system we have.

Using another recent case we can go to my many comments on the Chauvin case. I said from the beginning that Chauvin just as every other defendant had three paths to acquittal.

1) Chauvin wasn’t the person involved. This path was closed by the video and his own statements.

2) Chauvin was not responsible for the cause of death. For this Chauvin and any other defendant would need experts to testify that the cause of death was wrong, or that the evidence was misinterpreted. For that the Experts need access to all evidence to conduct their own tests.

3) the action that led to the outcome were reasonable or within policy. If you acted within the ideas of self defense. The reasonable person in that situation argument. Or for a cop, just doing what I was supposed to within policy.

I would demand this for every single defendant. I would argue for this if Hitler was the defendant. When the Government was exposed as lying and providing false statements to the court during the Bundy trial in Nevada I cheered the dismissal of all charges. Not because I agree with Bundy. I still believe he is an unequaled asshat. But because that is what is supposed to happen.

The Constitution makes it hard to convict someone. It is supposed to be hard to get a conviction. And I don’t want it any other way. I don’t care who the defendant is. I want it to be hard to convict anyone.

I have no issue with a rigorous defense but I object to justice is what you can afford. Lots of lower income individuals sit in prison because they couldn’t afford a high powered attorney with vast resources at their disposal.

 

[SavannahMann]

I have no issue with a rigorous defense but I object to justice is what you can afford. Lots of lower income individuals sit in prison because they couldn’t afford a high powered attorney with vast resources at their disposal.

I agree. But Public Defenders never get a fraction of the funding they could really use. The lawyers are swamped with cases. Even in the most liberal of states, California, the DA gets twice as much money as a department as the Public Defenders do.

Think about that and realize that most of the experts the DA calls are already paid by the city or county. The Coroner, the Police Lab experts. That doesn’t come out of his budget. The Fire Marshals who can describe Arson. Paid by the County or city.

I would love for everyone to get the OJ Dream Team. I would love for everyone to get the best defense available. Sadly most get the best defense possible given the circumstances. Which isn’t much.

After that, you are left hoping for a jury like the one in 12 Angry Men, that can take the evidence and find the truth. You hope they put a little doubt and a lot of discussion and debate into it.

 

[MarathonMike]

View attachment 764058
NEW MEXICO (KRQE) — Alec Baldwin’s attorney told a judge on Thursday that the state destroyed the gun used in the deadly “Rust” movie-set shooting. The announcment was made during a status hearing in the case against “Rust” actor-producer Alec Baldwin and the film’s armorer Hannah Gutierrez-Reed.

During the hearing, an attorney for Baldwin, Alex Spiro, said he received an email from the state that the defense would be receiving discovery Thursday. Spiro also brought up the fact that the firearm at the center of this case has been destroyed by the state. “That’s obviously an issue, and we’re going to have to see that firearm — or what’s left of it,” Spiro said.

More....

Wow, this has to be the first time I've heard of the government destroying evidence to HELP a defendant. Leftist privilege sure is great......I guess New Mexico really needs that cowboy movie money.

What the heck? The "state" destroyed the primary evidence? I guess all those retarded Trump impressions on SNL have paid off for Baldwin.

 

[SavannahMann]

The Charges against Baldwin were dismissed and while we don’t have a statement from the DA yet. We can assume the destruction of the key evidence, the firearm, played a major part in that decision.

 

[MarathonMike]

Evidence in a murder has never been destroyed before a trail is started

Yes, but that was before the Democrats controlled all aspects of our so-called Department Of Justice. The DOJ is now just another wing of the Democratic Army that takes their orders and do what they are told. Lady Justice is dead.

 

[pyetro]

View attachment 764058
NEW MEXICO (KRQE) — Alec Baldwin’s attorney told a judge on Thursday that the state destroyed the gun used in the deadly “Rust” movie-set shooting. The announcment was made during a status hearing in the case against “Rust” actor-producer Alec Baldwin and the film’s armorer Hannah Gutierrez-Reed.

During the hearing, an attorney for Baldwin, Alex Spiro, said he received an email from the state that the defense would be receiving discovery Thursday. Spiro also brought up the fact that the firearm at the center of this case has been destroyed by the state. “That’s obviously an issue, and we’re going to have to see that firearm — or what’s left of it,” Spiro said.

More....

Wow, this has to be the first time I've heard of the government destroying evidence to HELP a defendant. Leftist privilege sure is great......I guess New Mexico really needs that cowboy movie money.

The headline says "DA’s office denies Alec Baldwin’s attorney’s claim the gun used in shooting was ‘destroyed’ "

DA’s office denies Alec Baldwin’s attorney’s claim the gun used in shooting was ‘destroyed’​

DA’s office denies Alec Baldwin’s attorney’s claim the gun used in shooting was ‘destroyed’​

​

Thread failm​

​

 

[pyetro]

The Charges against Baldwin were dismissed and while we don’t have a statement from the DA yet. We can assume the destruction of the key evidence, the firearm, played a major part in that decision.

The thread title says "DA’s office denies Alec Baldwin’s attorney’s claim the gun used in shooting was ‘destroyed’ "

moron.

 

[SavannahMann]

The headline says "DA’s office denies Alec Baldwin’s attorney’s claim the gun used in shooting was ‘destroyed’ "

DA’s office denies Alec Baldwin’s attorney’s claim the gun used in shooting was ‘destroyed’​

DA’s office denies Alec Baldwin’s attorney’s claim the gun used in shooting was ‘destroyed’​

​

Thread failm​

​

Did you read beyond that or just quit? I’m betting you quit. The DA says that the internal mechanism was destroyed but the weapon could still be an exhibit at the trial.

That precludes any testing or examination of the weapon as it existed at the time of the shooting by defense experts. So there is a failure in the thread. And it’s not what you think it is.

 

[Dragonlady]

View attachment 764058
NEW MEXICO (KRQE) — Alec Baldwin’s attorney told a judge on Thursday that the state destroyed the gun used in the deadly “Rust” movie-set shooting. The announcment was made during a status hearing in the case against “Rust” actor-producer Alec Baldwin and the film’s armorer Hannah Gutierrez-Reed.

During the hearing, an attorney for Baldwin, Alex Spiro, said he received an email from the state that the defense would be receiving discovery Thursday. Spiro also brought up the fact that the firearm at the center of this case has been destroyed by the state. “That’s obviously an issue, and we’re going to have to see that firearm — or what’s left of it,” Spiro said.

More....

Wow, this has to be the first time I've heard of the government destroying evidence to HELP a defendant. Leftist privilege sure is great......I guess New Mexico really needs that cowboy movie money.

Did you even read your own link. The DA said that the gun has N0T been destroyed:

"Alec Baldwin’s attorney told a judge on Thursday that the state destroyed the gun used in the deadly “Rust” movie-set shooting. The announcment was made during a status hearing in the case against “Rust” actor-producer Alec Baldwin and the film’s armorer Hannah Gutierrez-Reed. However, the New Mexico First Judicial District Attorney released a statement after the hearing stating that the gun was not destroyed."

 

[1srelluc]

Did you even read your own link. The DA said that the gun has N0T been destroyed:

"Alec Baldwin’s attorney told a judge on Thursday that the state destroyed the gun used in the deadly “Rust” movie-set shooting. The announcment was made during a status hearing in the case against “Rust” actor-producer Alec Baldwin and the film’s armorer Hannah Gutierrez-Reed. However, the New Mexico First Judicial District Attorney released a statement after the hearing stating that the gun was not destroyed."

"Destroyed" was a unfortunate word.....What happened was the FBI "analysis" of the weapon messed it up so bad that the weapon was useless as far as either the state or the defense using it to show any malfunction or lack thereof.

However:

FBI testing of the gun used in the fatal shooting on the movie set of “Rust” found that the weapon handled by actor Alec Baldwin could not be fired without pulling the trigger while the gun was cocked, according to a newly released forensics report.

Weapon in deadly ‘Rust’ film set shooting could not be fired without pulling the trigger, FBI forensic testing finds

FBI testing of the gun used in the fatal shooting on the movie set of “Rust” found that the weapon handled by actor Alec Baldwin could not be fired without pulling the trigger while the…

www.mercurynews.com

Sadly the FBI's (and ATF's) ham-handedness when it comes to testing weapons and messing them up in the process is nothing new.

 

[Papageorgio]

The rich seem to always get the breaks, had this happened to a poor black, it would have meant prison for him.