Crime Fix with Angenette Levy - Alec Baldwin Sues 'Rust' Prosecutors and Detectives

Episode Date: January 13, 2025

Actor Alec Baldwin has filed a lawsuit against the prosecutors and Santa Fe County Sheriff's investigators who were involved in filing an involuntary manslaughter charge against him for the death of cinematographer Halyna Hutchins. The case collapsed in spectacular fashion last summer when the judge dismissed the case over the state's failure to disclose evidence to Baldwin's defense. Law&Crime's Angenette Levy looks at Baldwin's claims of malicious prosecution and defamation in this episode of Crime Fix — a daily show covering the biggest stories in crime.Host:Angenette Levy  https://twitter.com/Angenette5Guest:John DayCRIME FIX PRODUCTION:Head of Social Media, YouTube - Bobby SzokeSocial Media Management - Vanessa BeinVideo Editing - Daniel CamachoGuest Booking - Alyssa Fisher & Diane KayeSTAY UP-TO-DATE WITH THE LAW&CRIME NETWORK:Watch Law&Crime Network on YouTubeTV: https://bit.ly/3td2e3yWhere To Watch Law&Crime Network: https://bit.ly/3akxLK5Sign Up For Law&Crime's Daily Newsletter: https://bit.ly/LawandCrimeNewsletterRead Fascinating Articles From Law&Crime Network: https://bit.ly/3td2IqoLAW&CRIME NETWORK SOCIAL MEDIA:Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/lawandcrime/Twitter: https://twitter.com/LawCrimeNetworkFacebook: https://www.facebook.com/lawandcrimeTwitch: https://www.twitch.tv/lawandcrimenetworkSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Wondery Plus subscribers can binge all episodes of this law and crimes series ad free right now. Join Wondery Plus in the Wondery app, Apple podcasts or Spotify. Your motion to dismiss with prejudice is granted. Months after a judge tossed the case, actor Alec Baldwin is suing the prosecutors and detectives who tried to put him in prison for the fatal shooting on the set of Rust. I have the lawsuit and what the actor claims after the state's case imploded during his trial. Welcome to Crime Fix. I'm Anjanette Levy. It's a little hard to believe, but Alec Baldwin wants to go back to court in New Mexico, but this time he's the one bringing the case. Baldwin is suing most of the prosecutors who were involved in the Rust case and members of

the Santa Fe County Sheriff's Office. The actor claims malicious prosecution, violation of his civil rights, and defamation. Now, this isn't a huge shock. We knew this was likely coming. Baldwin's lawyers had sent letters to the prosecutors and the Sheriff's Office demanding they preserve everything related to the case after Judge Mary Marlowe-Summer threw out the case last July on the fourth day of the trial. The state's discovery violation has injected a needless and curable delay into the instant jury trial. Dismissal with prejudice is warranted to ensure the integrity of the judicial system and the efficient administration of justice. Your motion to dismiss with prejudice

is granted. Judge Marlo Summer determined the special prosecutor didn't turn over evidence that could have possibly helped Baldwin's defense. More on that in a bit. But first, a quick recap on the case. Baldwin was holding the gun that fired and killed cinematographer Helena Hutchins on the set of Rust back in October of 2021. The case was shocking because the gun that Baldwin was holding had a live round in it, which is basically unheard of on a movie set. Hutchins was a well-liked and well-respected cinematographer originally from Ukraine. She had a young son. Here's a little bit of the body camera footage from that day when deputies and medics arrived at the Bonanza Ranch. How's it going, sir? So my understanding, you were in the room when the lady went?

Yeah. Okay. All righty. Well, I know your name, so let me give up my lieutenant and see where we want you to hang out. Okay. Yes, sir. All right. Give me just a second. Now, one of the big questions, how did live ammo get on this movie set? The film's armorer, Hannah Gutierrez-Reed, was young and inexperienced. She was responsible for the firearms. And the first assistant director, Dave Halls, was also involved in checking the gun before it was given to Baldwin. In January of 2023, more than a year after the shooting,

Prosecutor Mary Carmack-Altweese and Special Prosecutor Andrea Reeb announced that Alec Baldwin and Hannah Gutierrez-Reed were being charged with involuntary manslaughter. Halls pleaded no contest to a misdemeanor charge for failing to check the entire cylinder of the gun that day. But sir, let me ask you, you indicated that you only saw three or four. You didn't see six. I don't recall her fully rotating the cylinder. Okay. You don't recall her fully rotating it? I do not. Okay. And even though the cylinder wasn't fully rotated,

did you let that safety check sort of pass? I did. Okay. But the prosecution seemed to have issues from the start. First, a firearms enhancement was improperly added and then dropped from Baldwin's manslaughter charge, and Special Prosecutor Reeb had to step away from the case because she was also a state legislator, and that presented some sort of conflict.

Kerry Morrissey was appointed as Special Prosecutor and dismissed the charge against Alec Baldwin, but said it could be refiled at a later date. It seemed like the case against Alec Baldwin was likely over at that point, but it wasn't. Months later, a grand jury indicted Alec Baldwin on an involuntary manslaughter charge again. Morrissey later claimed in court documents that she did so after Baldwin failed to respond to a misdemeanor plea offer, and she got wind that he planned to file a lawsuit

against the state of New Mexico on the same day that he would plead guilty to the misdemeanor charge. So this whole thing has been pretty messy from the start. Fast forward to March of 2024. Hannah Gutierrez-Reed went to trial and was found guilty of involuntary manslaughter. I'm sentencing you to 18 months of incarceration at a New Mexico women's correctional facility. I find that what you did constitutes a serious violent offense. It was committed in a physically violent manner, a fatal gunshot, done with your recklessness in the face of knowledge that your acts were reasonably likely to result in serious harm.

You were the armorer, the one that stood between a safe weapon and a weapon that could kill someone. You alone turned a safe weapon into a lethal weapon. But for you, Ms. Hutchins would be alive. A husband would have his partner and a little boy would have his mother. Please take her. Gutierrez-Reed is serving an 18-month prison sentence. Then came Alec Baldwin's trial in July of last year. I was there. It came to light that the sheriff's office, on the last day of Gutierrez-Reed's trial, came into possession of some ammunition that could be related to the case. It was a mix of ammunition that came from Gutierrez-Reed's father's stash,

legendary Hollywood armorer Thel Reed. His friend, Troy Teske, stored that ammo for him. Morrissey got on the stand and testified to try to save her case. So when Mr. Teske couldn't get Mr. Bowles to take them because they were the best evidence against his client, he took them over to the sheriff's department. And when he dropped them at the sheriff's department, I was told that there was going to be a report. There was a report. I assumed they looked like these. And Detective Hancock indicated to me that because he dropped them off and he didn't wait for her, she was then going to try to follow up with him, take a statement from him, so that we could

get some idea where they came from, what the relevance was, if there was any relevance at all. And he never returned her phone calls. And that's all of the information that I can give the court, but I'm happy to answer any questions. Alec Baldwin's attorneys have suggested that live ammo ended up in a box of dummy rounds from the prop house that supplied the guns and ammo to the set of rust or from members of the crew who may have been firing guns in the desert. Now Alec Baldwin is suing the lead detective, Alexandria Hancock, the crime scene technician, Marissa Popple, the county prosecutor, Mary Carmack-Altweese, a former special prosecutor, Andrea Reeb, and the current special prosecutor

Kerry Morrissey. Baldwin makes a number of claims, including violation of his civil rights, malicious prosecution, intentional spoilation of evidence, and defamation. Baldwin claims the special prosecutor revealed information about the grand jury hearing the evidence in the case to a news outlet. He writes, to make matters even worse, in these discussions, the state also revealed its illicit motivations behind its prosecution of Baldwin. As reported by NBC News, prosecutors haven't said publicly what new evidence they have obtained during their months of investigation, but a source familiar with the case said the special prosecutors have had discussions, which they said they hope the trial will humble Baldwin, specifically citing his run-ins with paparazzi and public comments that weren't about the case.

The source added that the intention is for it to be a teachable moment for Baldwin. Baldwin also says prosecutors repeatedly delayed handing over evidence throughout the case. Over the next five months, the state intentionally failed to comply with these obligations. It delayed its disclosure of important evidence for weeks and months after receiving it or failed to disclose it at all. It failed and refused to respond to inquiries from Baldwin's attorneys about evidence and the state's disclosure obligations. Even worse, the state lied to Baldwin and to the court to cover up what it was doing. All of this undermined Baldwin's right to a fair trial

as protected by United States and New Mexico law. Defendant's conduct was the result of a calculated and malicious plan by the state to obtain a conviction through illicit means. And for all of this, Alec Baldwin says he wants an unspecified amount of damages. He writes, as a direct and proximate result of the defendant's unreasonable and unlawful actions, Baldwin has suffered and continues to suffer substantial

past and future damages, both compensatory and general, including but not limited to legal expenses, loss of income, severe emotional distress, mental anguish, and embarrassment in an amount to be determined at trial. He continues, because defendants' actions were motivated by evil motive or intent and involved a reckless or callous indifference to Baldwin's constitutionally protected rights, an award of punitive damages is appropriate to the fullest extent permitted by law. Now, in response, I asked the special prosecutor, Carrie Morrissey, whether she had anything to say, and she sent me the following statement. In October of 2023, the prosecution team became

aware that Mr. Baldwin intended to file a retaliatory civil lawsuit. This was three months before Mr. Baldwin was indicted by the grand jury. We look forward to our day in court. I want to bring in John Day. He is a lawyer in Santa Fe, New Mexico, and we actually spent quite a bit of time together out there covering the Alec Baldwin trial. So, John, we kind of knew this was coming. We just didn't know when it was coming. So, your thoughts on the lawsuit filed by Alec Baldwin. Right. Not surprising. Baldwin and his team had certainly made it clear that they were going to be striking back at the special prosecutor in the Santa Fe Sheriff's Office. And so when they dropped this lawsuit, I don't think anyone was surprised.

I mean, it's certainly, you know, Baldwin strikes back is what this is. And the fact is, is that it's a tough one because prosecutors are generally cloaked in prosecutorial immunity. And I was kind of wondering about that because, you know, you have this case where Alec Baldwin was obviously handling the firearm and they they sought the criminal charge. They filed the involuntary manslaughter charge. I mean, they lay out in great detail why they believe they have a case for malicious prosecution and they're suing, you know, the detectives, they're suing the prosecutor, the special prosecutor. I mean, they're suing everybody, suing the county commissioners. So, I mean, you're saying it's a tough one i mean they're saying malicious prosecution intentional spoilation of evidence for the gun being broken during the testing

defamation i mean these do seem kind of like tough claims so you know is he is he just striking back to strike back or what's the deal here well there may be something there so generally in new mexico and other jurisdictions if you're a prosecutor the same way if you're a judge, you can't be sued for your, when you're doing your job as a prosecutor, when you're doing your job as a judge, you're basically immune from suit for being a prosecutor. Now, where there might be a way for Baldwin and his team to pierce that protective veil is if they can somehow establish that the special prosecutor in this case was acting as a law enforcement officer, was acting in their investigatory role rather than the prosecutorial role. That's the one area where prosecutorial immunity can be pierced. And in this case, what Baldwin and his team are alleging is that these prosecutors went above and beyond what they should have done in their, according to Baldwin, in their zeal to

go after him. You know, they say that the prosecutors were motivated not just by their prosecutorial duty, but that they had this personal vendetta against Baldwin, that the comments that they made publicly in national media, the fact that they claim that, you know, according to even the judge thought this, that there was evidence being withheld, that there were so many steps taken that were out of the ordinary for a regular prosecution. And Baldwin and his team are saying this ought to raise this lawsuit to something that is not just, you know, the prosecutor didn't do a good job to the prosecutor was motivated by something that was impermissible. The prosecutor was motivated by an effort to get Baldwin. And

when they did that, they brought in things like political considerations. You know, that one special prosecutor who before she was taken off the case was running for office and she seemed to think that this was going to help her out politically, things like that. So the Baldwin's lawsuit raises a lot of issues. There are a lot of ways that they're trying to get under that veil, the protective veil of immunity. And one of the things I thought was interesting that they cited was, you know, they quote sources. And I'm assuming this came from the special prosecutors. I mean, it had to have where they talked talked about this report to NBC News. And NBC News

said, you know, sources close to the case basically said they think this will be a teachable moment, that it will humble Alec Baldwin because he's had all these run-ins with the paparazzi and things like that. I mean, that's not why, if that's indeed true, that's not why prosecutors are supposed to pursue criminal cases, because you didn't like how somebody acted in the past. You're supposed to go with the facts in front of you. Right. And that may be the downfall of the special prosecutor. all the different times that there were comments, what they call extrajudicial comments, comments made out of the courtroom, outside of the pleadings, comments that were made to the media by the prosecutorial team about what was going on, what their motivation was, what their intentions were. I mean, the cleanest way for these prosecutors to have handled this was just to

have shut up, not to have hired a media consultant, not to make statements to the national media, but they chose a different path. They chose to, I think they thought they were trying to fight back or they were trying to respond to what they saw as false statements and self-serving statements by Baldwin. The problem is when you're a prosecutor, you have a duty that's not like a defense lawyer. You have a special heightened responsibility as a prosecutor not to engage in that kind of stuff. And so that may be the downfall. If this suit is successful in any way, if the suit is successful in piercing the prosecutorial immunity veil, it's going to be because the prosecutors were doing things that were outside the realm of normal prosecution. And again, it also may be because if Baldwin

can establish that the prosecutors, for example, the evidence that the judge said was withheld or intentionally withheld, if the Baldwin team can establish that that was something that was done in the prosecutor's role as law enforcement investigators, that may be successful for them. But generally, the immunity prosecutors have is pretty extensive. Interesting. Yeah. And they claim that the prosecutors, the original ones, Mary Carmack, Altweese, the elected prosecutor, and then Andrea Reeb, the one who had to step away, that they hired a PR firm and paid them more than like $300,000 to arrange all these interviews. And the defamation came in when they said things like he's guilty of a crime and things like that. And they're saying that, you know, they said all these things,

you know, to basically dirty him up. And yes, Alec Baldwin was doing a lot of talking on his own then. He did the George Stephanopoulos interview. He would post things on Instagram and things like that. So it'll be interesting to see how it plays out and of course Alec Baldwin also posted on Instagram about this suit which I found interesting you know he's just kind of like this here it is basically um so where do you see this going because this is going to take years does this does this even go to trial I mean what what happens with this because Carrie Morrissey is basically like bring it on in her statement she said know, we knew he was going to do this. We found out in October of 2023, he was going to file some type of lawsuit against the state of New Mexico. And she's like,

we're ready. Yeah. You know, again, I think so much of this is going to boil down to, you know, this is not just a case where, say a civil case where lawyers on one side make statements publicly, lawyers on the other side, make statements for budding that, you know, there are charges flying back and forth. The difference is this is a prosecution. The difference is the special prosecutor again has these heightened special obligations,

special responsibilities not to engage in public responses to things that the defense may say. You're supposed to just suck it up. And the fact that the prosecution in this case did hire a national PR firm, did spend lots of state tax money on spokespeople who didn't actually do a very good job, in my opinion. The fact that they chose to engage in this, they chose to try to rebut things that Baldwin was saying publicly, that may be problematic for them because that's not how, you know, if you look at the ABA guidelines for prosecutors, it talks again about the prosecutor's role as a minister of justice. Those are the words they use. They don't say, yeah, prosecutors, you know what, if you feel

like your case is being attacked publicly, go for it. Go ahead and launch a rebuttal. Go ahead and launch attacks on the defendant. That's outside the bounds of what prosecutors are supposed to do. So this may be, I mean, what's going to be fascinating is, again, how far does this get? You know, the state of New Mexico now has to pay lots of money to defend its special prosecutors, to defend the county sheriff, to defend the board of commissioners here on this case. And I mean, this is far from over. And you can see how Baldwin's team are salivating at the chance to do discovery on this one. Yeah, most definitely. And it could take years. John Day, thank you so much. Appreciate it. Thank you.

And that's it for this episode of Crime Fix. I'm Anjanette Levy. Thanks so much for being with me. I'll see you back here next time.