I ask forbearance for taking this long to get back to that, but wading through 12 pages of mostly pure horseshit takes a toll, and I could only stand a page or two at a time.
TL;DR? Prop Tart Hannah Reed was clearly only the second-most retarded and incompetent person at their job in that state in October of 2021. Prosecutor Altwies FTW.
Detailed fisking, after perusing twelve pages of nonsense, follows:
The only count arguable for any defendant is the second count "a lawful act...which might produce death without due caution and circumspection".
Halfwit D.A. Mary Altwies then goes into considerable detail to make her case, as one would hope in such a proceeding.
Her first error is referring to Baldwin as "a primary producer of the film". In forensic argument, this called Lying With The Truth, as Baldwin was, in fact, a producer of the film, but as there were ten to twelve such producers, the only way to make him primary would be to ass-rape the English language in open court. He was no such thing.
Baldwin came up with the story idea, which he assigned to the company, in exchange for being lead actor, credit as one of the producers, and likely a fraction of the gross profits. (There are no net profits on movies, as Art Buckwald learned to his chagrin after Paramount stole the idea for Coming To America from him, and when he won the suit, they explained to him how he was owed nothing, since it "never made a profit", on a movie that grossed $289M). Starring in the movie, and coming up with the story idea, were the sum total of his producer responsibilities on the project. Trying to rope him into being legally responsible for conduct outside of that is far beyond recockulous, and his culpability never rises above a share of civil damages (good luck with that on an LLC), let alone criminal conduct.
The D.A. alleges that the scene being rehearsed "did not require the weapon to be fired". Problem she's going to have there is that sworn affidavits from all concerned a year and a half ago stated that the scene was of Baldwin's character drawing, cocking, and firing while pointing right at the camera. In subsequent paragraphs, the D.A. admits that the rehearsal repeatedly involved Baldwin practicing drawing, pointing, and cocking the pistol, with his finger on the trigger. And the only way to let the hammer down after cocking it is to pull the trigger. So the D.A. cannot have this both ways, and still claim "J'Accuse!". At the end of the day, it won't matter, in any event, because none of that action matters in proving Baldwin's criminal negligence.
The D.A. alleges that common practice would have been to use a "plastic gun or replica gun".
1) That's not common practice.
2) That's not up to Baldwin, neither as actor nor producer.
3) It would have been idiotic to use anything that couldn't be cocked and fired, as that's the exact thing being rehearsed. So suggestions of using a plastic gun are quite simply retarded, as well as factually wrong. And it's also not common practice to swap back and forth between the "hero" prop, and a replica, between rehearsal and shooting the scene. That just adds more unnecessary complication and confusion, so once again, is neither common practice, nor smart, and thus a functionally retarded suggestion.
The following is quoted at length:
"Statements and evidence show BALDWIN was not present for required firearms training prior to the commencement of filming. Statements, depositions from OSHA, and evidence show BALDWIN was provided only minimal training on firearms, even after REED requested more training for BALDWIN. In the deposition taken from REED, she state BALDWIN had very limited training on the cross-draw that was required for the scene on the 21st and limited training in firearms and how to check his own firearm as to whether it was unloaded or loaded, in which REED felt it was very important in his role as RUST[sic]. A training session for at least an hour or more was scheduled, but the actual training consisted of only approximately 30 minutes as according to REED, BALDWIN was distracted and talking on his cell phone to his family during the training."
So the District Attorney is saying that, based on the deep experience (roughly 5 minutes of actual cinematic weapons handling) of Reed, Baldwin wasn't competent, because he missed 30 minutes of a 60-minute training session, conducted by such a rank amateur?!?
And after 15 months of investigation and deliberation, that's what they brought to court to find Baldwin negligent?
We'll get back to the D.A's allegation that Baldwin was incompetent at weapons handling later in her summation. [Hint: Shot herself in the foot, right there. No pun intended.]
She then notes that the F.B.I. was unable to get the weapon in question to fire inadvertently.
Point Of Order: You cannot "prove" a negative. The FBI merely proved they couldn't get the weapon to fire inadvertently, not that it cannot be done. "Unable to reproduce result" damns the tester, not the allegation, by logical necessity. Edison couldn't get a light bulb to work 999 times, either. That didn't prove electric light bulbs are impossible.
The FBI did find FIVE OTHER live rounds on the set of Rust, in addition to the one that went off, and further determined that they did not match any rounds on hand at the prop supplier for the picture (in what must have been a vast relief to that company).
Of the five recovered,
one was in Reed's possession when police arrived,
one was on her armorer's cart (along with the spent casing from the fatal round fired)
one was on a bandolier on her cart,
one from Baldwin's holster [sic - probably belt loop] inside the church, and
one from an unsecured ammunition box located on the armorer's cart.
So there were six live rounds in total scattered all around the working set. All in violation of an entire safety bulletin, and all totally without any knowledge of same, by Reed, Halls, or anyone else.
And anyone figures Baldwin, unlike the propmaster, weapon handler, weapons assistant/1st AD, stunt people, or anyone else, would have been able to determine this critical fact on the day, by "checking"...how, praytell?
"Evidence further shows that BALDWIN, as an actor who has extensive experience in the film industry involving firearm(s)"
Waitwaitwait, D.A. Yappypants: Just a few short paragraphs back, you were alleging that Baldwin was a menace to society because he was undertrained, having perhaps missed 30 more minutes of weapons instruction of someone doing firearms in movies for less time than the reader has been reading this article, so far. WTAF?!?!? Which is it? You can't have that both ways, yet here we are.
Then she damns him, as an actor, for not demanding
"at least (2) two safety checks between the armorer and himself and witnessing the handling of firearms by the first assistant director. Standard protocol is the armorer to show the firearm, pull the bullets out in front of the actor, and demonstrate there are no live rounds (but dummies) in the firearm. BALDWIN knows this is standard safety protocols he has mentioned it in media interviews and in law enforcement interviews. REED did not do this protocol in front of BALDWIN. BALDWIN did not object to this action. REED discusses in her interviews with OSHA and law enforcement this should have occurred. REED also acknowledges in her interviews she should have been in the church with the firearm at all times. Instead, she left the church while BALDWIN was in possession of a firearm while in close proximity to cast and crew. BALDWIN further acknowledges that it is standard protocol for armorers to stay with the firearm at all times in the media and interviews."
This is why it was so hard to get through this. There is so much bullshit in that one paragraph, it would choke a 40-mule wagon team to death at one sitting.
There is NO REQUIREMENT that the rounds be loaded in front of the actor. The requirement is that the armorer and their designated armorer assistant check the weapon and monitor the loading. Actors near the line of fire may request to witness that loading. There is no stipulation that the actor holding the prop, or anyone else, check the loading, witness it, nor even be present. Period. Counselor Halfwit could look it up.
And so far, she's just done a splendid job of damning the multiple failings of Prop Tart Reed, and admitted criminal felon Halls, (let off by the same D.A. with just a six-month's probation wrist slap) who was the first assistant director, and has already admitted his own criminally negligent failures to provide due diligence in weapons checking.
All they've got Baldwin on are not doing Reed's job, and not doing weapons assistant (and 1st Assistant Director) Halls' jobs, and yet they're trying to make it Baldwin's responsibility to triple-check their performance and whereabouts, something which is no part of anyone else's job, not actors, not directors, and not producers. This all happened because of serial failures by Reed and Halls, as we've told you. And told you. And told you.
But wait! There's more!
And which, in due course, we'll continue with. This is only the halfway point of Altwies' wander into stretching like ElastiGirl to come up with some theory whereby any of the cock-ups detailed on that cursed production are Baldwin's fault, and frankly, we're hungry, and a nice meal beats the prospect of examining the rest of Altwies' halfwitical brain droppings, rather than tucking in to a fine dinner. We'll pick this up later, after our appetite cannot be further ruined.