Alec Baldwin Again Tries To Dismiss ‘Rust’ Indictment

Although the “30 Rock” actor insists that he did not pull the trigger on the firearm, Hutchins was fatally shot and director Joel Souza was injured on the set of the Western film. Armorer Hannah Gutierrez-Reed was found guilty of involuntary manslaughter and sentenced to the state maximum of 18 months behind bars as a result of the shooting.

In July 2024, Alec Baldwin will also face a jury in New Mexico, despite his lawyer’s attempts to dismiss the “Rust” indictment against him.

According to court documents obtained by The Blast, Baldwin’s defense team submitted a 25-page filing arguing that the State destroyed key evidence ahead of the trial. His lawyers wasted no time with their accusation, opening the document with a preliminary statement that states, “There is no dispute that the State knowingly destroyed the most important piece of evidence in the case without taking even the most basic steps to document its original condition.”

“Defendant Alec Baldwin now has no ability to examine or test the gun in its original state to disprove the government’s theory that he pulled the trigger on the day of the accident,” the statement continues, noting that “Alec Baldwin repeatedly told investigators that he had not pulled the trigger and the gun just ‘went off.’”

There has been some debate in previous filings over whether or not the gun was modified. The question also came home during the trial of Hannah Gutierrez-Reed, which took place earlier this year. In this filing, Baldwin’s lawyers state that “the firearm shows telltale signs of preexisting modifications, such as smoothing and tool marks on the hammer and ear.”

Prosecutors previously attributed those alterations to FBI testing, which Baldwin’s lawyers claim is implausible. “It is clear that the internal components of the firearm designed to prevent accidental discharges had likely been modified before the accident,” the filing states. “But because of the State’s needless destruction of the firearm, the defense can never examine and test the gun to determine whether those modifications corroborate Baldwin’s statements that he did not pull the trigger.”

Although the State wanted to see if the gun would indeed fire without the trigger being pulled to corroborate Baldwin’s claim, Baldwin’s lawyers note that “The State’s own experts have admitted that the FBI testing – basically, hitting the gun with a mallet – was inappropriate, unnecessary, and untethered to the circumstances of the case.”

They also accuse the FBI of not performing the correct tests on the weapon and note that detectives who were working on the case “did not provide the FBI with details about the facts and circumstances of the case that might have informed their testing decisions.” They go on to say that it is not clear if the FBI “preserved every piece of the broken gun in its testing.”

The actor’s legal team also has an issue with the way that the evidence was collection. “The State’s arguments obscure that neither its own experts nor the FBI examiner knows the condition of the firearm on October 21, 2021,” they state, explaining that there are no pictures of the internal components of the firearm.

They also say that the FBI did not take pictures or video-record their testing “because prosecutors and state investigators never asked for those basic steps to preserve this critical piece of evidence.” As such, Baldwin’s legal team claims that “no witness can testify about the firearm’s original condition.”

Baldwin’s legal team also argued that the FBI conducted testing six months after the October 2021 shooting of Halyna Hutchins. Detective Hancock requested the testing in order to “disprove” Baldwin’s statement that he had not pulled the trigger.

“The State fails to address that Detective Hancock, once informed that the proposed testing she sought could destroy the firearm, authorized the testing without providing any notice to Baldwin or others identified at the time as ‘persons of interests,’” the filing states.

Baldwin’s legal team insists that this case is a due process violation for the destruction of evidence and seeks that the charges against the actor be dropped. However, it remains to be seen if that will happen with only a month left until the trial date. A hearing was already held last month to try to get the charges dropped but Judge Mary Marlowe Sommer, who oversaw the armorer’s trial as well, felt that the case against Baldwin could proceed to trial.