US judge tosses Alec Baldwin manslaughter case over withheld evidence

Alec Baldwin's trial for involuntary manslaughter collapsed in spectacular fashion as a judge found key evidence over a fatal shooting on the set of "Rust" had been withheld from the defence, and dismissed the case.

Judge Mary Marlowe Sommer, presiding over the trial in Santa Fe, New Mexico, said on Friday that bullets potentially linked to the death of cinematographer Halyna Hutchins that could have been favourable to Baldwin's case had not been shared with his lawyers by police and prosecutors.

The Hollywood A-lister immediately burst into tears, as the case —which could have seen him sentenced to 18 months in prison if found guilty — was abruptly tossed out in sensational scenes.

"The state's willful withholding of this information was intentional and deliberate. If this conduct does not rise to the level of bad faith, it certainly comes so near to bad faith as to show signs of scorching prejudice," said Marlowe Sommer.

"The court concludes that this conduct is highly prejudicial to the defendant."

Baldwin was holding a gun in the direction of Hutchins during a rehearsal in October 2021 when the weapon fired, killing Hutchins and wounding the film's director.

The movie's armourer Hannah Gutierrez, who loaded the fatal weapon, is already serving 18 months in prison for involuntary manslaughter.

Baldwin was facing the same charge. Prosecutors claim he ignored basic gun safety laws and acted recklessly on set.

Baldwin's celebrity lawyer Alex Spiro argued the actor had no responsibility for checking the weapon's deadly contents and did not know it contained live rounds.

But the defence's case also rested heavily on discrediting the police investigation.

And Spiro on Thursday introduced evidence that live bullets potentially linked to the shooting had been handed to police, but not disclosed to Baldwin's lawyers.

'Dumbfounded'

Baldwin is highly unlikely to see the inside of a criminal court again over the shooting, legal experts said, though he could still face civil suits.

"As far as the criminal proceedings, it's over. They can't refile," said Los Angeles lawyer Tre Lovell.

"It's been dismissed with prejudice. To try to do it again would be double jeopardy. You can't do that."

University of Richmond law professor Carl Tobias agreed that "on the criminal side, I think it's done."

"The prosecutors could try to somehow mount an extraordinary appeal. But I don't think any appellate court is going to agree with the prosecutor," he said.

The withheld evidence could benefit Gutierrez, the film's armourer who has already launched an appeal, and David Halls, the movie's first assistant director who took a plea deal and admitted negligence.

Christopher Melcher, a Los Angeles-based attorney, said he was "dumbfounded" by the case's sudden collapse.

"The case unfolded as quickly as I've ever seen a case... It was just absolutely amazing to watch."