[subego]

Originally Posted by reader50 

Sounds more like Kenney was able to prove his rounds were clean.

I feel what best fits the evidence is Gutierrez-Reed’s dad mixed them up, but this was such an unfathomable mistake from a world renowned pro it took longer than it should have to catch.

In the days following the shooting, Kenney went with the “it’s her fault no matter what because she’s the armorer” defense. This implies he felt his ability to prove the rounds he supplied were clean was in question.



Orphaned on last page:

Originally Posted by reader50 

Side question, for you rather than the case. Is it odd for multiple parties to bring ammo to a set? Feels like a security concern, and a liability issue. I'd expect all ammo to be accounted for through a single person, perhaps called an armorer.

The armorer is going to be the only person authorized to bring ammo to the set.

Kenney handed his supply over to the armorer.

[subego]

A friend of Thell Reed brought ammunition to the police he said was pertinent to the killing. The prosecution deemed it irrelevant, but failed to inform or make it available to the defense.

The prosecution decided to publicly defend this to the judge, and the special prosecutor walked in protest.

Judge didn’t buy what the prosecution was selling. Case dismissed with prejudice. Baldwin’s a free man.

[OreoCookie]

Originally Posted by subego 

A friend of Thell Reed brought ammunition to the police he said was pertinent to the killing. The prosecution deemed it irrelevant, but failed to inform or make it available to the defense.

The prosecution decided to publicly defend this to the judge, and the special prosecutor walked in protest.

A Brady violation, seriously? No matter what you think of the case, I think you can expect Baldwin to have top notch legal representation and lots of public attention to the case.

I wonder whether this has any implication for the armorer's case, too. (I haven't kept tabs, but I reckon this is something to file an appeal if one hasn't been filed already.)

[subego]

FWIU, the armorer wants to add it to her appeal, which is already in progress.

Not sure how that would work though. Introducing new evidence to an appeal is tricky. Also, it’s not like the evidence comes from a disinterested party. Lastly, IIUC, he didn’t give it to the police until the day the jury in her trial delivered a verdict.

[OreoCookie]

Originally Posted by subego 

FWIU, the armorer wants to add it to her appeal, which is already in progress.

Not sure how that would work though. Introducing new evidence to an appeal is tricky.

Yeah, I was following the Adnan Syed story for many years and learnt how difficult that is even if the prosecution's or police's behavior is egregious. So I have no idea. But in the end, this might tip the conviction. It did in Syed's case, it just took two decades.

[reader50]

I'm annoyed that Baldwin's role as producer wasn't allowed to be considered. While a court determined the armorer was the immediate cause, the root cause was likely cheapskate producers cutting corners to save money. If so and it isn't punished, it will keep happening.

[OreoCookie]

@reader
I agree. That’s the pity here. A court case is also for the public to better understand what has happened. It would have been worthwhile to figure out the culpability of top management to judge the actions of the armorer or Baldwin-the-actor.

The armorer got less lucky as the (potential) Brady violation was disclosed well after she got sentenced. (Just to be clear, I don’t know whether the disclosure would have changed her verdict or set Baldwin free, but it should have been weighed.)

[subego]

Originally Posted by reader50 

I'm annoyed that Baldwin's role as producer wasn't allowed to be considered. While a court determined the armorer was the immediate cause, the root cause was likely cheapskate producers cutting corners to save money. If so and it isn't punished, it will keep happening.

Here’s the relevant part from the judge on this

“I’m having real difficulty with the state’s position that they want to show that as a producer he didn’t follow guidelines and therefore as an actor Mr. Baldwin did all of these things wrong that resulted in the death of Ms. Hutchins because as a producer he allowed these things to happen,” Judge Mary Marlowe Sommer said. “I’m denying evidence of his status as a producer.”

Which I would summarize as “you have to pick one”.

I personally would pick producer, because as an actor he’s innocent.

[reader50]

Originally Posted by subego 

Which I would summarize as “you have to pick one”.

I personally would pick producer, because as an actor he’s innocent.

I agree with this. Baldwin as an actor might have been careless (pointing a gun at someone during warmup), but that seems weak. No one has alleged Baldwin had anything to do with the live ammo getting on set.

However, Producer Baldwin apparently provided some of the budget, and probably had a lot to do with general safety sloppiness. Most likely to save money.

btw, I also agree with Oreo about understanding what happened. I was looking forward to the court determining where the live ammo came from. Yes, the armorer didn't catch them - but who provided them in the first place? We've heard several theories, but it never got settled.

[subego]

AFAIK, the shot was being framed, so the gun needed to be pointed where it was to be pointed during actual filming.

As for how the ammo got on the set, the best theory I’ve heard so far is my own.

Thell Reed mixed them up and then handed them off to his daughter, who didn’t check them because she assumed her dad wasn’t a fuckup.