Accountability for On-Set Deaths: New Mexico’s Case Against Alec Baldwin

by Camille Chandler, Associate Member, University of Cincinnati Law Review Vol. 92

I. Introduction

In the fall of 2021, a shocking and tragic incident befell the television and movie industry that captivated the American public for months. On the set of Western movie Rust, a gun held by actor Alec Baldwin discharged, killing Halyna Hutchins, the cinematographer, and injuring Joel Souza, the director.¹ While the incident received considerable new attention, this accident was not the first of its kind. Since 1990, more than forty-three people have died on movie sets in the U.S., and 150 have been injured.² In fact, many of America’s most popular movies, including The Avengers and Star Wars experienced behind-the-scenes accidents that often went unmentioned.³ The sad reality is many victims and their families are left with few legal options and the production companies are rarely held accountable; whether that be through monetary penalties, or criminal charges.⁴ However, the Rust accident was different; in January 2024, Alec Baldwin was indicted for involuntary manslaughter for the death of Hutchins.⁵ With little precedent on the matter, the State of New Mexico v. Alexander Rae Baldwin raises many questions as to the best mechanism for holding Baldwin and the production company accountable.⁶

Part II of this article takes an in depth look at the details of Hutchinson’s death; discussing film industry safety rules as well as previous on-set gun deaths, specifically the death of Brandon Lee. Part III focuses on two alternative legal theories, predicated on a New Mexico statute, that prosecutors are pursuing against Baldwin. Lastly, Part IV discusses the prosecutors’ likelihood of success in applying the New Mexico statute to the Rust accident, ultimately concluding that the State is unlikely to win in this case.

II. Background

Alec Baldwin was originally charged for Rust cinematographer Halyna Huchinson’s death in 2023, but the prosecutors later dropped the charges due to a lack of evidence regarding how the gun went off.⁷ In January 2024, prosecutors in Santa Fe County, New Mexico re-charged Alec Baldwin for his role in the accident.⁸ The decision to re-charge Baldwin came after an independent forensic test was conducted, revealing that Baldwin would have had to pull the trigger for the gun to fire.⁹ This differs from Baldwin’s statements claiming he never pulled the trigger.¹⁰ In addition to the criminal charges, Baldwin has already settled several civil suits filed against him by Hutchinson’s family members.¹¹ However, this article will primarily focus on the criminal case against him.¹²

A. Baldwin’s Fatal Mistake

On October 21, 2021, Alec Baldwin fired a real gun, being used as a prop in the film Rust.¹³ The scene Baldwin was rehearsing required him to “cross-draw” the gun from its holster and finish with him directing the gun towards the camera.¹⁴ According to an affidavit from the film’s director, Joel Souza, the gun went off when Baldwin aimed it at the camera.¹⁵ Witnesses agree that Baldwin was holding the gun when it fired. However, it is disputed who allowed for a loaded gun to be placed in Baldwin’s hands to begin with.¹⁶

In his affidavit, Souza claimed that David Halls, the film’s assistant director, handed Baldwin the gun, assuring him it was “cold.”¹⁷ Further, industry standards prohibit the use of live ammunition in any capacity.¹⁸ Additionally, prior to any actor handling a weapon, the intended safety procedures required the armourer, Hannah Gutierrez-Reed, to first check the weapon before handing it to Halls to conduct a second check.¹⁹ Both Gutierrez-Reed and Halls claim to have had no knowledge as to how the live rounds of ammunition appeared on-set.²⁰ Many in the cast and crew blame both Gutierrez-Reed and Halls for the accident, since it was their job to ensure the gun was safe.²¹

Since Hutchinson’s death, multiple cast and crew members have described the disorganization and chaos that occurred on set in the days leading up to the accident.²² They attest that multiple workers left the set in protest, on the day of the shooting, after numerous safety precautions were being ignored.²³ These workers claim that the lack of safety precautions was influenced by the production’s desire to save money and many believe this contributed to the accident.²⁴ In fact, reports revealed that prior to Hutchinson’s death, there had been three other on-set misfires of prop guns that same day.²⁵

Baldwin has been very forthcoming in denying responsibility for Hutchinson’s death.²⁶ In an interview following the accident, he explained that because bullets were never supposed to be on-set in the first place, let alone in the gun, he should not be responsible for the accident.²⁷ Baldwin has maintained that he had no knowledge that the gun was loaded and did not realize that a bullet from the gun had caused the accident until an hour after the gun went off.²⁸ The recent forensic report determined that this specific gun required the pull of the trigger for it to fire, meaning that Baldwin had to have pulled the trigger, causing Hutchinson’s death.²⁹

Since the accident, Dave Hall agreed to a plea deal and will do six months of probation with a suspended sentence for negligent use of a deadly weapon.³⁰ Hannah Gutierrez-Reed has pled not guilty to the involuntary manslaughter charges filed against her.³¹ Baldwin, who is facing two counts of involuntary manslaughter, has also pled not guilty to the charges.³²

B. Industry Standards

Many film industry experts have since come forth arguing that this accident was readily preventable, had the required safety standards been followed.³³ A report, produced by the Occupational Health and Safety Bureau, stated that production had violated New Mexico’s regulations “by ignoring recognized hazards inherent to the use of firearms and ammunition by failing to take appropriate corrective or investigative actions after two firearms-related incidents” had occurred in that same day.³⁴ The report also discusses Rust management’s failure to follow film industry safety procedures issued by the Industry Wide Labor-Management Safety Committee.³⁵ The report concluded that there was a “plain indifference” with respect to the firearms being used and recommended that a “Willful-Serious citation with penalties” should be issued to the Rust’s production.³⁶ The New Mexico Occupational Health and Safety Bureau ultimately fined Rust’s production $136,793 for these violations.³⁷

Independent from the Bureau’s investigation, members of the public have expressed safety measures that could have prevented the accident. Based on industry standards, live ammunition is never allowed on-set in any capacity, which clearly had not been followed in this case.³⁸ Moreover, it is best practice to treat any on-set weapon as if it could potentially kill someone.³⁹ This ensures that every person on set handles the weapon with the utmost caution.⁴⁰

C. Previous Hollywood Deaths

Sadly, Hutchinson’s death was not the first of its kind. Two previous deaths have occurred in Hollywood because of prop guns; Actor Brandon Lee, on the set of The Crow and Jon-Erik Hexum on the set of Cover Up.⁴¹ Hexum’s death occurred after the young actor fired a blank round into his own head while jokingly playing a round of Russian roulette during a break in production.⁴² Although there was no bullet, the force of the gun firing fractured his skull, causing a severe brain bleed; due to the nature of his death no one was criminally charged.⁴³ However, Hexum’s mother received a settlement amount from 20^th Century Fox and the film’s producers.⁴⁴

Roughly ten years after Hexum’s death, Lee died in a manner similar to Hutchinson. Lee was shot and killed when a real gun, loaded with defective dummy rounds of ammunition, discharged.⁴⁵ Like Baldwin, the actor holding the gun believed the gun to be empty.⁴⁶ However, the dummy ammunition had been manufactured incorrectly and the gun unintentionally released a projectile.⁴⁷ An autopsy later revealed a bullet lodged near Lee’s spine.⁴⁸ No one was ever criminally charged for Lee’s death, likely because the governing law required criminal negligence to be “willful and wanton,”⁴⁹ which the prosecutor later revealed he found no evidence of during the investigation.⁵⁰

III. Baldwin’s Liability

Baldwin is currently facing involuntary manslaughter charges.⁵¹ According to the indictment, prosecutors are charging Baldwin under two different legal definitions.⁵² New Mexico’s involuntary manslaughter statute states that involuntary manslaughter is “manslaughter committed in the commission of an unlawful act not amounting to felony, or in the commission of a lawful act which might produce death in an unlawful manner or without due caution and circumspection.”⁵³ The prosecution’s indictment charges Baldwin with “causing a death by negligent use of a firearm and by acting without due caution or circumspection.”⁵⁴

Under this statute, involuntary manslaughter can occur in three circumstances, however the prosecution is only pursuing two.⁵⁵ The first is if a death occurs as a result of the defendant committing a misdemeanor.⁵⁶ The second, is when a lawful act occurs that could result in death “without due caution and circumspection.”⁵⁷ In order to succeed on the first, the prosecution would need to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Baldwin’s negligent use of a firearm caused Hutchinson’s death, which also requires a showing of criminal negligence.⁵⁸ To succeed under the second theory, the prosecution needs to show that Baldwin acted with a “willful disregard for the safety of others.” The latter theory requires that Baldwin was aware of the risk and acted anyways, whereas the first theory only states that he should have known there was a risk he could kill someone while holding the gun.⁵⁹

IV. Low Likelihood of Success

Having established the criminal liability theories being pursued, it is necessary to gauge each theory’s likelihood of success.

A. Negligent Use of a Firearm

Under this theory the prosecution first needs to show that Baldwin violated New Mexico Statatute Annotated. § 30-7-4(A)(3), which states that negligent use of a deadly weapon includes “endangering the safety of another by handling or using a firearm or other deadly weapon in a negligent manner.”⁶⁰ A jury must find that Baldwin failed to do something that a reasonable person would do in the same situation.⁶¹

In everyday life it is commonly assumed that firearms are loaded and potentially dangerous, however, in the context of a movie set the same assumption may not be made. Further, since professionals are hired to oversee the management of weapons and there is a rule against ammunition on-set, it seems fair for Baldwin to assume the gun really was “cold” and could not kill someone. Screen Actors Guild-American Federation of Television and Radio Artists, a union who commonly represents actors, argued that it is not an actor’s duty to inspect a firearm when using it in a film.⁶² The very reason weapons experts are hired is to ensure set safety. Thus, it seems that Baldwin has a strong defense against the assertion he acted unreasonably. He entrusted hired professionals to do their job and ensure the weapon was safe. Baldwin was even assured of the gun’s safety directly before taking it; therefore, it is reasonably understandable why he relied on their professional opinion.

B. Without Due Caution and Circumspection

The prosecution’s second liability theory hinges on whether Baldwin acted with a “willful disregard for the safety of others.”⁶³ Under this theory, Baldwin would have to have been aware of the possibility that the gun could kill someone and still handled the gun and pulled the trigger anyways. This theory holds even if Baldwin had no intention of killing anyone, which is true.

The prosecution will likely argue that Baldwin’s role as a producer would have made him aware of the safety violations, since this role carries more weight.⁶⁴ Although, Baldwin will likely refute this argument since it is common practice in the film industry for a producer to be nothing more than an investor.⁶⁵ However, the fact that there were three other misfires of prop guns that day supports the prosecution’s case. The prosecution’s overall argument seems weakened by Halls telling Baldwin the gun was “cold” right before. There seems no reason, besides the other safety violations, that Baldwin would not trust Halls’ word. Therefore, it seems unlikely that Baldwin will be found guilty under this theory.

V. Conclusion

This case is the first time an on-set gun death has resulted in criminal charges. Due to this being unprecedented territory, the prosecution will likely face an uphill battle in convicting Baldwin under either of the theories they included in the indictment. However, if Baldwin is convicted, this case could have major implications for the film industry. It could significantly raise the responsibility placed on actors when handling weapons on-set. Safety on movie sets has already increased significantly since the accident, and it is likely to increase even more if he is convicted. What happened on the Rust set was a tragic accident, and the fact that it could have been prevented only worsens that. However, Baldwin reasonably relied on hired professionals to ensure safety on-set and likely had no substantial reason to believe anything to the contrary. With little precedent to rely on and the reasonableness of Baldwin’s actions, he will likely walk free after pulling the trigger that killed Halyna Hutchins.

Cover Photo by Chris Murray on Unsplash

Camille Chandler

Before starting law school, Camille Chandler received a degree in Political Science and International Affairs with a minor in Psychology from Western Kentucky University. She is primarily interested in pursuing transactional work but is always open to expanding her knowledge in other areas of the law as well. She is currently serving as the Executive Blog Editor of the Law Review.

References

1
Gina Martinez, Alec Baldwin “Rust” Shooting: A Timeline of Events in Halyna Hutchins’ Death, CBS News (Jan. 31, 2024), https://www.cbsnews.com/news/rust-shooting-timeline-alec-baldwin-halyna-hutchins/.
2
Anthony McCartney, AP: Too Quiet on the Set; Filming Accidents Often Go Untold, Associated Press (Nov. 21, 2016), https://apnews.com/article/2dfb6c787f2249529ae04c9443828a7f.
3
Id.
4
Id.
5
Martinez, supra note 1.
6
State v. Baldwin, No. D-0101-CR-2024-00013 (N.M. 1st Dist. Ct. 2024).
7
Martinez, supra note 1.
8
Cara Tabachnick, New “Rust” Shooting Criminal Charges Filed Against Alec Baldwin for Incident That Killed Halyna Hutchins, CBS News (Jan. 19, 2024), https://www.cbsnews.com/news/rust-shooting-alec-baldwin-new-criminal-charge-involuntary-manslaughter/.
9
Andrew Hay & Steve Gorman, Alec Baldwin again charged with manslaughter in ‘Rust’ movie-set shooting, Reuters (Jan. 19, 2024), https://www.reuters.com/legal/alec-baldwin-again-charged-with-manslaughter-rust-movie-set-shooting-2024-01-19/.
10
Id.
11
Claire Lampen et al., Everything We Know About the Rust Shooting, The Cut (Feb. 1, 2024), https://www.thecut.com/2022/08/alec-baldwin-prop-gun-accident-fatal-shooting-on-rust-set.html.
12
Id.
13
Morgan Lee, Prosecutors File Charges Against Alec Baldwin in ‘Rust’ Set Shooting, PBS News Hour (Jan. 31, 2023), https://www.pbs.org/newshour/arts/prosecutors-file-charges-against-alec-baldwin-in-rust-set-shooting.
14
Id.
15
Id.
16
Lampen et al., supra note 11.
17
Luke Harding, Alec Baldwin Was Pointing Gun at Camera When It Went Off, Director Says, The Guardian (Oct. 25, 2021), https://www.theguardian.com/film/2021/oct/25/alec-baldwin-was-rehearsing-scene-when-gun-went-off-rust-director-says; “Cold” guns do not contain live rounds of ammunition and are typically used in the film industry to mimic gunshots in movies.
18
Id.
19
Id.
20
Lampen et al., supra note 11.
21
Harding, supra note 17.
22
Lampen et al., supra note 11.
23
Id.
24
Id.
25
Id.
26
Id.
27
Lampen et al., supra note 11.
28
Id.
29
Id.
30
Id.
31
Julia Jacobs, The Legal Question at the Center of the Alec Baldwin Criminal Case, N.Y. Times (Jan. 20, 2024), https://www.nytimes.com/2024/01/20/movies/alec-baldwin-criminal-case.html.
32
Id.
33
Marco della Cava, ‘Rust’ Movie Receives Maximum Fine for Gun Safety Failures in Alec Baldwin Shooting, USA Today (Apr. 20, 2022), https://www.usatoday.com/story/entertainment/movies/2022/04/20/rust-movie-maximum-fine-gun-safety-failures-alec-baldwin-shooting/7385746001/.
34
Occupational Health and Safety Bureau, Summary of Investigation, State of New Mexico Environment Department, https://deadline.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/04/2022-04-19-NM-OSHA-Rust-Summary-of-Investigation.pdf.
35
Id.
36
Id.
37
Id.
38
Id.
39
Jaclyn Diaz, On-Set Deaths from Prop Guns Are Rare – but Not Unheard of, Nat’l Pub. Radio(Oct. 22, 2021), https://www.npr.org/2021/10/22/1048295916/props-gun-death-injuries-rust-movie-set-rare.
40
Id.
41
Andrew Court, Prop Gun Deaths that Haunt Hollywood: Jon-Erik Hexum and Brandon Lee, N.Y. Post (Oct. 22, 2021), https://nypost.com/2021/10/22/prop-gun-deaths-haunt-hollywood-young-stars-shot-on-set/.
42
Id.
43
Id.
44
Id.
45
Id.
46
Maria Puente, Why Wasn’t Anyone Criminally Charged in Brandon Lee’s death? Those Involved Look Back, USA Today (Oct. 31, 2024), https://www.usatoday.com/story/entertainment/celebrities/2021/10/31/alec-baldwin-rust-set-shooting-brings-questions-brandon-lee/8570212002/.
47
Id.
48
Diaz, supra note 39.
49
N.M. Stat. Ann. § 30-2-3 (LexisNexis 2024).
50
Puente, supra note 46.
51
Hay & Gorman, supra note 9.
52
Id.
53
N.M. Stat. Ann. § 30-2-3 (LexisNexis 2024).
54
Hay & Gorman, supra note 9; In this case use of a firearm would presumably be an unlawful act not amounting to a felony.
55
State v. Henley, 2010-NMSC-039, 148 N.M. 359, 237 P.3d 103.
56
Id.
57
Id.
58
Id.
59
Jacobs, supra note 31.
60
N.M. Stat. Ann. § 30-7-4(A)(3) (LexisNexis 2024).
61
State v. Grubbs, 1973-NMCA-096, 85 N.M. 365, 512 P.2d 693.
62
Lampen et al., supra note 11.
63
Jacobs, supra note 31.
64
Gun Safety on Movie Sets Improved After Alec Baldwin Shooting, Experts Say, The Guardian (Jan. 20, 2023), https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2023/jan/20/gun-safety-movie-sets-alec-baldwin-rust-shooting.
65
Id.