Two key details of the Alec Baldwin trial are beyond dispute: Cinematographer Halina Hutchins was shot and killed on the set of a movie. rust. The man with the gun was Baldwin.
So it might sound like his case of manslaughter is already a done deal. No, but not for the reasons you think.
For example, there has been much debate over Baldwin’s claim that he did not pull the trigger and instead the gun malfunctioned, according to the forensic report. Dispute That’s it. But the prosecution yet The very outlines of the law make it an uphill battle.
The key to securing an involuntary manslaughter conviction in New Mexico is that the government must prove criminal negligence. On the surface, it would seem easy to successfully argue that pointing a gun at someone and (presumably) shooting them is considered negligence.
But here “fault” does not refer to the colloquial understanding of the term. Main skipping (2011)The New Mexico Supreme Court explained that a deeper level of evidence was required: that the defendant acted with “willful disregard for the rights or safety of others” and with “subjective knowledge” of the danger posed by his actions. In practice, this means that the jury must unanimously agree, beyond a reasonable doubt, that Baldwin “actually thought that the gun was loaded.” Write “And yet he aimed it and pulled the trigger,” said UCLA law professor Eugene Volok.
In other words, it is not enough to show that Baldwin acted irresponsibly or was grossly irresponsible with firearms. Instead, prosecutors go a step further and say that he I really believed it There may have been live ammunition in the gun, but he ignored that reality and took a chance.
Maybe the prosecution ~ can Prove it, the state claims rust The set was chaotic, and Baldwin himself had a pattern of carelessness. Claim He quickly pulled out his gun for dramatic effect.
But this case is not as conclusive as it is sometimes claimed, especially given Baldwin’s defense argument: that it is well established that prop guns should not be loaded with live ammunition on movie sets, and that Baldwin therefore believed it was empty. “On a movie set, you can pull the trigger, so even if he intentionally pulled the trigger… that doesn’t establish murder,” said one of his attorneys, Alex Spiro. said The jury said: “He did not know, and had no reason to know, that the gun was loaded with live ammunition.”
That doesn’t mean Baldwin is above reproach. It’s complicated. wrote Last year, given the uncomfortable fact that Baldwin was a polarizing figure, many would have been glad to see him investigated after years of hearing about his political outbursts and his reputation. Treat people badly Without excuses. I don’t like many of his alleged actions. But there is a distinction between what is guilty in the eyes of the public and what is guilty in the eyes of the law. And even people with unpalatable pasts deserve fairness under the law.
