Armorer Hannah Gutierrez-Reed was found guilty of involuntary manslaughter in the death of Halyna Hutchins and not guilty of tampering with evidence on the set of Rust. She faces up to 18 months in prison.
This is a tragic story all around with no winners at the end. Hannah Gutierrez was just 24 years old at the time. She was inexperienced, working on her second film ever as lead armorer, and was allegedly shouted at by Nicholas Cage on her first film. As it came out during the trial, while the filming of Rust was taking place, Guttierez was once again giving reasons for the cast and crew to be frustrated with her. There were two accidental discharges – something which should be extremely rare on professional movie sets – before the fatal shooting.
Gutierrez did not receive her knowledge as an armorer from any course, but from her father, veteran Hollywood armorer Thell Reed, which may furnish an explanation of how she got her two high-profile jobs while being so young, green, and of questionable competence for a position which should assure everyone’s safety when dealing with firearms on set. Now that Gutierrez was found criminally liable, people can’t help but wonder: What does this mean for Alec Baldwin, who has his own trial this summer? There are two opposing strong, well-founded opinions in this regard.
Before we get into them and what Gutierrez’s verdict means for Baldwin’s upcoming trial, let’s have a look at the two opposing, but equally as astute, strategies from the attorneys at the most recent Rust trial.
Impressive, vigorous, unyielding lawyering on both sides
The prosecution and defense were on top of their game, and it’s rare to see a trial where the two sides are providing equally strong lawyering. Special prosecutor Kari Morrissey did not let up: she was incisive and kept one of the most assertive postures I’ve seen in a prosecutor. She showed multiple instances of how Gutierrez failed to follow proper safety protocols, such as bringing ammunition from a previous movie she worked at to the Rust set or being seen holding firearms in an unsafe manner.
This evidence came from set photos and videos, the witnesses, and Gutierrez’s own statements via bodycam footage and police station interviews. The prosecutor didn’t prove beyond a reasonable doubt where the live ammunition came from, but she did prove, judging by the jury’s verdict, that a fatal shooting was only a question of time, and that, with Gutierrez’s poor job as an armorer, the tragic event was foreseeable, which falls under the conditions of the ruling of involuntary manslaughter.
On the other side, defense attorney Jason Bowles put forth compelling arguments to show Hannah Gutierrez could not have done a proper job on such a set, and that other people, a few of the witnesses, also had a hand in what ultimately happened but shouldn’t have. His main defense strategy was that Gutierrez was nothing more, nothing less than a useful scapegoat. The live ammunition, he argued, came, not from Gutierrez, but from Seth Kenney, the weapons and ammo supplier.
On top of that, Alec Baldwin was an intervening cause because he pulled the trigger and pointed the firearm at Halyna and director Joel Souza, which you should never do even if you believe you’ve been handed a cold gun. Both prosecution and defense asserted Baldwin’s culpability, although to different ends.
Two ways Alec Baldwin’s trial could go
Let’s start with a “not guilty” verdict. The most obvious defense, which Baldwin’s lawyers will certainly argue, is that Hannah Gutierrez’s verdict proves that the lead armorer, the person who must make sure every gun on set is safe for use before handing them to anyone, failed to do her job. They will also argue that Baldwin could not have possibly foreseen that a gun with a live round was being handed to him.
Some would argue this outcome would lean upon Jason Bowles’ position that his client, one of the youngest and most inexperienced people on that set, is being used as a scapegoat, the only bearer of blame when it is clear the conditions on the Rust set were less than ideal on many fronts. One only hears of the poor conditions of the camera crew, who quit just before the shooting took place, to understand that the Rust production was a complete mess, for lack of a better word.
This is actually a point against Baldwin and for his conviction. His El Dorado pictures – of which his lawyers say he’s the only responsible party – were producing the film, and thus, Baldwin, a producer for Rust, bears responsibility for the bad set conditions. While Gutierrez had only had a major position as an armorer in solely two films, Baldwin has nearly a hundred movie titles under his belt.
Another major point of contention will be whether Baldwin pulled the trigger or not. Baldwin famously said he did not. A weapons expert convincingly argued during Gutierrez’s trial that that gun model couldn’t have fired otherwise. However, the actor’s defense council argues otherwise. On Thursday, Mar. 14, Deadline reported Baldwin’s attorneys filed a motion to have the case dismissed, arguing the “State prosecutors have engaged in misconduct.” Baldwin wants the case thrown out but there’s a good chance it won’t be.
According to the latest recorded hearing in which both sides spoke to a judge about staying the legal proceedings or not, it became clear that Baldwin will plead the fifth, and like Gutierrez, not take the stand at his own trial. This will prevent him from making any other self-incriminating statements.
Will that be enough to save him from a facing criminal repercussion? It remains to be seen when the trial starts on July 9.
