Alec Baldwin Will Be Charged With Involuntary Manslaughter in ‘Rust’ Killing

[speeder]

Originally Posted by HobieMarty

So let me get this straight. A person lost their life at the complete negligence of others. A trigger WAS pulled, and a gun was fired, which resulted in the death of someone, and no one is going to be held accountable for this due to, basically, a technicality? Sounds fishy to me.
Where is the justice?

Sent from my SM-S916U using Tapatalk

First of all, there is no such thing as "a technicality" in criminal trials. It's a term used by people who either don't understand the justice system in the United States or simply don't like the outcome of a ruling. Usually both. Evidence is either allowed or not and rules on evidence are in place for reasons previously decided in a court of law, lawyers on both sides have an obligation to understand and obey these rules. Nothing "technical" about it.

Originally Posted by Chocaholic

I’d say, this result stinks. We have our new OJ Simpson.

Wow, that's shrill. I happen to think that AB is guilty of the charge he faced but to equate a psychopath murderer who stabbed two people hundreds of times within feet of his sleeping children with an accidental death, (even the prosecution does not claim intention on AB's part), is about the most batschit thing on this thread. It's PARF level logic, just pure emo and check your brains at the door.

The cases have absolutely nothing in common, other than a famous defendant.

[greglepore]

I'm with Denis on this. The remedy for a Brady violation has always been a dismissal. The prosecution (which includes the police) have an absolute obligation to be fair to the defendant, and if they aren't, this is what happens. Its not a technicality. The police intentionally buried these rounds because they wanted to and made a decision, now they have to live with that.
And insofar as there are arguments that the evidence was meaningless, as well stated in the interview with the resigning prosecutor, the prosecution doesn't get to decide that. Any info the police have the defendant is entitled to have, so long as they ask by filing a Brady request.

[Seahawk]

Originally Posted by speeder

She has a lot of integrity.

Yes.

I have mentioned many times that my sister was a prosecutor for over 2 decades... she absolutely was floored that the Prosecutor in this case was, one, assigned in April and two, left with a faulty evidence trail.

In these high interest, press attention, trials and legal proceedings, it is incumbent on the Prosecution to be sanitary.

Period.

Just so you guys know exactly how much law I know, I slept with a female law student in college, so...

[Chocaholic]

Originally Posted by speeder

Wow, that's shrill. I happen to think that AB is guilty of the charge he faced but to equate a psychopath murderer who stabbed two people hundreds of times within feet of his sleeping children with an accidental death, (even the prosecution does not claim intention on AB's part), is about the most batschit thing on this thread. It's PARF level logic, just pure emo and check your brains at the door.

The cases have absolutely nothing in common, other than a famous defendant.

Two famous defendants who each got away with killing an innocent woman. Nope, no similarity at all.

Emo, indeed. Sheesh.

[HobieMarty]

Originally Posted by speeder

First of all, there is no such thing as "a technicality" in criminal trials. It's a term used by people who either don't understand the justice system in the United States or simply don't like the outcome of a ruling. Usually both. Evidence is either allowed or not and rules on evidence are in place for reasons previously decided in a court of law, lawyers on both sides have an obligation to understand and obey these rules. Nothing "technical" about it.







Wow, that's shrill. I happen to think that AB is guilty of the charge he faced but to equate a psychopath murderer who stabbed two people hundreds of times within feet of his sleeping children with an accidental death, (even the prosecution does not claim intention on AB's part), is about the most batschit thing on this thread. It's PARF level logic, just pure emo and check your brains at the door.



The cases have absolutely nothing in common, other than a famous defendant.

So, you said "first of all" but never followed up with a "second of all." I couldn't care any less about Alec Baldwin and the outcome of the ruling in this case actually because, well, I have a life, unlike the woman he shot!!!

Sent from my SM-S916U using Tapatalk

[Arizona_928]

Originally Posted by Chocaholic

Two famous defendants who each got away with killing an innocent woman. Nope, no similarity at all.

Some people don’t appreciate a good quip.

[speeder]

Originally Posted by Arizona_928

Some people don’t appreciate a good quip.

I love a good quip. Got one?

[Arizona_928]

Sure… The world is divided into two classes: those who believe half of what they hear, and those who know better.

[HobieMarty]

Originally Posted by Arizona_928

Sure… The world is divided into two classes: those who believe half of what they hear, and those who know better.

Good one!!! ^^^

Sent from my SM-S916U using Tapatalk

[speeder]

There are two kinds of people in the world; people who think that there are two kinds of people and people who don't.

[speeder]

Originally Posted by HobieMarty

So, you said "first of all" but never followed up with a "second of all." I couldn't care any less about Alec Baldwin and the outcome of the ruling in this case actually because, well, I have a life, unlike the woman he shot!!!

Sent from my SM-S916U using Tapatalk

You wanted a second opinion? Ok...you're a maroon.

[KFC911]

Ahem .... there are only 10 kinds of people ... some "get it" ... most don't....

Do you ?

[Bob Kontak]

Originally Posted by speeder

You wanted a second opinion? Ok...you're a maroon.

Marty, California Mafia.

Be warry warry careful.

[HobieMarty]

I knew I should've taken that left turn at Albuquerque!!!

https://youtu.be/e8TUwHTfOOU?feature=shared

Sent from my SM-S916U using Tapatalk

[Jeff Higgins]

What a schitt show. The police and prosecutor absolutely fck'd this one up. No doubt about it. But, at the end of the day, Baldwin still killed someone. Should he be rewarded for their malfeasance with an absolute dismissal, with prejudice, of the charges against him? It's as though those entrenched in our criminal justice system see their own little games as more important than the reasons we put them there in the first place - to bring to justice those in our society who have brought us harm. This was not justice.

[creaturecat]

Baldwin had zero responsibility.
he trusted the armourer - this is standard protocol. period.

[Jeff Higgins]

Originally Posted by creaturecat

Baldwin had zero responsibility.
he trusted the armourer - this is standard protocol. period.

But that's not why the charges were dismissed. If true, and acceptable outside of the movie industry, that would have been established at trial. That was not allowed to happen.

Instead we saw the judge punishing the police and prosecutor for their malfeasance. She could have declared a mistrial, allowing the defense to review the new evidence while scheduling a new trial date. But no, it was more important to her to make a point with the police and prosecutor that they don't get away with this in "her" court. Which is actually our court...

[greglepore]

Originally Posted by Jeff Higgins

But that's not why the charges were dismissed. If true, and acceptable outside of the movie industry, that would have been established at trial. That was not allowed to happen.

Instead we saw the judge punishing the police and prosecutor for their malfeasance. She could have declared a mistrial, allowing the defense to review the new evidence while scheduling a new trial date. But no, it was more important to her to make a point with the police and prosecutor that they don't get away with this in "her" court. Which is actually our court...

I mostly agree with this. I think that the distinction here, though, is that the judge likely thought that the police conduct in burying the report under a unique file # was intentional concealment, not inadvertence. But a mistrial without prejudice is an acceptable Brady remedy. Courts have been known to reverse themselves on the "with prejudice" issue.

[The Synergizer]

BS. Whether the armorer failed in her job or not, a fundamental of firearm safety is NEVER point a gun at anyone, let alone pull the trigger.

Originally Posted by creaturecat

Baldwin had zero responsibility.
he trusted the armourer - this is standard protocol. period.

[stevej37]

https://nypost.com/2024/07/13/us-news/smiling-alec-baldwin-heads-to-dinner-after-rust-charges-tossed/