Alec Baldwin, center, is flanked by two defense attorneys during a pretrial motions hearing in Santa Fe, N.M. on July 8, 2024. (Law&Crime Network)
Actor Alec Baldwin secured a significant victory during a pretrial hearing in his manslaughter case over the on-set shooting that took the life of cinematographer Halyna Hutchins in October 2021.
While Baldwin was also one of many producers of the film, his role in that regard will not be explored during his upcoming criminal trial which begins with jury selection on Tuesday, the court ruled.
On Monday morning, First Judicial District Court Judge Mary Marlowe Sommer heard a series of motions from the state and the defense. Those motions aimed to limit how each side in the case could make their presentations to the jurors who will decide the defendant’s fate.
A defense motion sought to fully bar the state from introducing evidence of Baldwin’s role as a producer on the ill-fated “Rust” set.
Prosecutor Erlinda Johnson argued Baldwin, as a producer, was “the boss” and had an increased level of authority and associated duties.
The state put forward the idea that its alternative theory of guilt required jurors to hear evidence about Baldwin’s dual roles. Johnson spent several minutes at the dais making the case — fending off frequent interjections and questions from a highly circumspect judge.
“I hardly know where to start because I don’t understand the theory or the facts,” one of Baldwin’s defense attorneys quipped on rebuttal.
In the end, Sommer expressed similar concerns.
“I’m having real difficulty with the state’s position,” the judge said of the theory. “I am denying evidence of his status as a producer.”
Permutations of the issue regarding Baldwin’s role as a producer cropped up throughout the hearing. Most of the time, the court came down on the defendant’s side during such disputes.
Before disallowing the Baldwin-as-producer evidence entirely, the court was asked by the state to bar the defense from calling another producer who they intended to use to rebut the state’s theory about a prosecutor’s liability. The court allowed the defense witness to be called. The upshot of that ruling, however, is in question since the state was later hamstrung regarding the basic producer issue.
Another defense motion also related to the producer issue. The defense moved to exclude videos of Baldwin using profanity against the crew and urging them to hurry on set as so-called “propensity evidence.” The state argued those “other acts” put the shooting “into context” and help to demonstrate Baldwin’s “mens rea.”
Ultimately, the court agreed with the defense. Later, it was established that Baldwin’s anger was either irrelevant and prejudicial in his actor role or expressly disallowed if it occurred in his producer role.
The dual producer-actor role issue was raised after a recess. The defense said they wanted to introduce an OSHA report about set safety. The state argued the defense was trying to have their cake and eat it, too, because that report was drafted for producers’ eyes. The judge warned the defense that if they did introduce that evidence, they would open the door to Baldwin’s role as a producer.
The state did notched a few more victories as well.
Videos of Baldwin handling the firearm on the set — sometimes in allegedly reckless ways — were admitted as relevant.
The court also OK’d a state’s witness over a defense objection but limited his potential testimony.
The state’s expert teaches producers set safety at a New Mexico university, helps draft set safety bulletins, and confers with the Producers Guild of America to develop set safety guidelines. In the end, the court accepted the witness as a set safety expert but not on how producers implement safety rules.
The defense also issued a broad motion that tried to limit how the state can deal with witnesses. Defense attorney Alex Spiro cited numerous examples of the same prosecution team impugning witnesses during the trial of “Rust” armorer, Hannah Gutierrez-Reed, who was convicted of the same crimes Baldwin now faces in March.
The judge wasn’t happy about the issue on any level.
“I don’t like these kinds of motions because I don’t like to be bound by them during trial,” Sommer said.
The judge then drew up her own plan intended to keep either the state or the defense from improper off-the-cuff statements.
“The sides have been contentious with one another,” the judge said, suggesting that objections might be used to try and influence jurors.
“If you’re going to object, it’s going to be up here,” Sommer added — saying objections would require sidebars away from jurors’ ears.
Spiro was all but at a loss. He said, for his part, his objections would be lodged using a single word, like “relevance” and nothing more.
“I think that’s an extreme use of discretion,” the defense attorney said. “I’m urging, almost begging the court to at least let us start that way.”
The court was unconvinced.
“I’m going to be in control of the courtroom,” Sommer said. “I’m sorry you haven’t experienced this.”
The judge said that, after awhile, if she feels the parties are abiding her rules, then maybe the rules can be relaxed in the future.
While a relatively placid atmosphere prevailed in Sommer’s small Santa Fe courtroom for most of the hearing, one of the prosecutors also used the word “contentious” to describe how the attorneys on either side have treated one another so far.
But, the state said, they were trying.
“We have been more than reasonable in trying to turn down the volume,” a prosecutor said as the hearing went into the late morning.
Special prosecutor Kari Morrissey dropped the charges against Baldwin in April 2023; they were refiled in January of this year.
The defendant faces 18 months in prison if convicted.
Have a tip we should know? [email protected]
