Alec Baldwin vs. New Mexico: Part 2 Mitigating Misinformation
Part 2 of my breakdown covering Alec Baldwin’s recently filed civil rights complaint against the government and numerous state actors. Here I’ll cover the context of the complaint while correcting popular misconceptions I’ve read about the case on social media.
Welcome back!
I’m going straight to correcting the loads of misinformation I’ve read across social media following the filing of Alec Baldwin’s civil rights complaint. I think reviewing the complaint from that perspective is more informative than reading it line by line at this point given the likelihood of an amended complaint in the future.
As a refresher, Baldwin’s civil rights complaint argues six claims that violate one of three “categories” of law. It’s really important to emphasize that each claim has different defendants and causes of action. It is not a one size fits all complaint.
Laws — Remember each comes with separate requirements, procedures, and limitations regarding immunity and damages
- 42 U.S.C. § 1983
- New Mexico Torts Claim Act
- New Mexico Civil Rights Act
Claims — Broken down by claim and defendants
- Conspiracy to Cause Malicious Prosecution and Deprivation of Civil Rights (All defendants — this is the only claim that includes Special Prosecutor Kari Morrissey)
- Suppression of Evidence and Deprivation of Civil Rights (Detective Hancock, Crime Scene Tech Poppell, Lt. Brandle)
- Malicious Abuse of Process (Detective Hancock, Crime Scene Tech Poppell, Lt. Brandle, and the County)
- Intentional Spoliation of Evidence (Detective Hancock, Crime Scene Tech Poppell, Commissioners, and the County)
- Defamation Per Se (District Attorney Mary Carmack-Altwies and former Special Prosecutor Andrea Reeb)
- Deprivation of Civil Rights under NM Constitution/Violation of NM Civil Rights Act (FJDA, Commissioners, the County)
Stop Spreading Misinformation!
Please read the complaint! I can’t say this enough. You can read the complaint by clicking here. Many thanks to Phaedra Haywood at the Santa Fe New Mexican for sharing the complaint with the public.
**Disclaimer: All discussion of misconduct below is alleged. Please keep that in mind as typing alleged became redundant.**
Misinformation: Baldwin’s suing Kari Morrissey / Baldwin’s only going after the State because they withheld evidence.
The headlines saying Baldwin is suing Kari Morrissey are misleading. Morrissey is only named in one out of six claims. Baldwin’s lawsuit isn’t just about Kari Morrissey. Nor is it limited to Morrissey and the Sheriff’s Office withholding/burying evidence. Alleged misconduct and mishandling of the Rust cases didn’t just suddenly start in 2024 when Teske turned in the ammo. There were issues for two and a half years before that point. Morrissey is just one piece of the pie which is evident if one actually reads Baldwin’s complaint.
Repeat after me: this complaint isn’t just about the Teske ammo.
If you run across someone in the wild saying this complaint is frivolous because Baldwin’s case “had nothing to do with the source of the bullets” it’s safe to say they haven’t read the complaint and don’t know what they’re talking about regarding Baldwin’s this lawsuit.
Misinformation: Judge Mary Marlowe Sommer didn’t need to dismiss the case with prejudice she had plenty of other options.
This isn’t part of Baldwin’s complaint but it’s worth including towards the top given how often I see this terribly incorrect take on Reddit. People are still ignoring Judge Mary’s reasoning (including NM case law) regarding dismissing Baldwin’s case with prejudice. Jeopardy attached! Why is that so hard for people to comprehend?
After Baldwin filed his complaint a misinformed person actually said this: “They [the Teske ammo] could’ve just been reconsidered and reevaluated and then entered back into evidence for later further questioning.” Ummm? That’s NOT how it works after a jury has been seated for three days. This person has clearly never worked in prosecution. They need to rewatch the last day of Baldwin’s trial and reread the order.
Judge Mary noted how the State repeatedly failed to fulfill discovery obligations. She described the State’s actions as “willful and deliberate misconduct” that resulted in “fundamental unfairness” that couldn’t be cured by lesser sanctions. SANCTIONS. When it reaches that point the prosecution doesn’t just get to hit reset and give it another go.
Misinformation: The prosecutors have immunity case closed!
Not so fast. I’m seeing this line of misinformation a lot, including from lawyers who haven’t followed this case closely or reviewed the laws Baldwin is suing under. Immunity is treated differently under the three categories of law. In addition to prosecutorial immunity there’s also immunity afforded to law enforcement and public bodies in some scenarios and not others.
It’s not as clear cut as people are making it seem. You can bet Baldwin’s Harvard educated lawyers crossed their t’s and dotted their i’s. This is why there’s three laws and six claims. The complaint was written with various immunities in mind. Think of a candy store with fill your own bags. If you take candy seriously you’re not going to mix your fruity candy with your chocolate candy (especially in a warm climate!) In a similar sense, the claims are tailored to the laws in this complaint with the various immunities in mind.
Regarding prosecutors, a main argument is that the defendants should not be afforded prosecutorial immunity because they acted in an administrative or investigative capacity beyond the prosecutorial function. So outside of the scope of what’s protected. Remember, some of the alleged misconduct occurred before a criminal information and determination of probable cause was even filed back in 2023.
Misinformation: Filing the Teske ammo under another case number was just a simple filing mistake.
The Teske ordeal wasn’t a mere “filing mistake” or “mislabeling” as some continue to call it. It was intentionally filed under a different case number. As both Judge Mary’s Order of Dismissal and Baldwin’s complaint point out.
Misinformation: Baldwin Was THE Producer and in Charge of Everything on Rust!
This misinformation was repeatedly put out there by DA Mary Carmack-Altwies and Andrea Reeb in numerous nationally televised media interviews. It’s still going strong two years later in 2025 thanks to those who haven’t followed the case consistently.
A quick look at the Rust call sheet from the day of the tragedy (in the Sheriff’s Report) shows Baldwin is joined by a multitude of other producers. The 1st AD (Dave Halls) is also THE Safety Coordinator. This is an industry wide recognized duty. The 1st AD is usually in charge of safety on the set of a film. If anyone has a “duty” regarding safety it’s the 1st AD. Surely the State’s “expert” Bryan Carpenter informed the prosecutors of this detail?
Apparently not. DA Mary Carmack-Altwies and Reeb improperly represented set safety as being Baldwin’s “duty” instead of Halls during their media blitz. No wonder Halls got such a sweet no contest plea deal! When your “experts” who lack any sort of legal training are part of your “team” drafting criminal informations this is what happens. Bravo FJDA!
Anyways! Back to the point here. There’s nine other producers on the film, ones who actually had more actual authority than Baldwin. Baldwin wasn’t even an Executive Producer. I think Baldwin’s role as Producer was more like an “in name only” sort of deal. There’s also a Line Producer and Co-Producer. From Hannah’s trial and evidence we know that Line Producer Gabrielle Pickle had decision making power with production decisions. If you’re interested in reading more about these producers click here.
Per Baldwin’s contract that’s been made public in court filings, Baldwin only had “creative” authority and did not have authority regarding hiring and firing. Hiring novices and communications with union reps weren’t handled by Baldwin. Rewatch Hannah’s trial. You’ll see everyone who actually made the decisions testify.
Sidenote: State “expert” Bryan Carpenter and his own production company have a movie or two in the making. One can’t help but wonder if he was hoping his screen time on the Rust cases would elevate and promote his own projects in the industry.
Misinformation: Baldwin’s case was “thrown out” / his “charges were dropped” so he should shut up, be happy with that, and let it go. Also similar arguments regarding dropped appeal.
There’s a few layers with this one. People continue to mischaracterize the dismissal with prejudice. A dismissal with prejudice is not the same as dropped charges! Remember when Morrissey first took over the case and dropped Baldwin’s initial 2023 charges? That’s dropping charges. In prosecution we call this a nol pross (short for nolle prosequi).
A judge holding an evidentiary hearing in the middle of trial once jeopardy has attached and dismissing a case with prejudice is very different and a much more serious matter. A similar line of misinformation has been spread regarding the State axing their appeal of Baldwin’s dismissal. The New Mexico Attorney General’s Office usually takes over appeals on behalf of the State. They straight up refused to takeover on Morrissey’s behalf, meaning they don’t have her back or that of the FJDA in Baldwin’s case. Their position supports Baldwin’s argument as to why he shouldn’t just let it go.
Actual quotes I took screenshots of because they are that bad:
“Reminder that a technical discharge of the trial is NOT an innocent verdict. A rich old white man was able to outspend the prosecution.” (Clearly this person is unaware that as of July 2024 the prosecution had spent over $750,000 on this case!)
“Just when you think this imbecile can’t stoop any lower he proves wrong. He really is his own worst enemy.”
Get Rust Trial Pile’s stories in your inbox
Join Medium for free to get updates from this writer.
“How could anyone argue that he should never have faced a trial for shooting a woman dead?” (Obviously this person missed all of the attorneys and legal scholars who argued that very position for years!)
Misinformation: “Alec planned on filing this lawsuit BEFORE any of this alleged egregious misconduct” (An actual quote from a misinformation repeat offender)
Quick take from a lawyer: duh notice.
First off, alleged egregious misconduct occurred for a year and a half prior to Kari Morrissey being assigned to the case. Examples include: not securing and searching the prop truck until six days after Halyna was shot and killed, not collecting Troy Teske’s ammo in November 2021 when LEO first learned about his evidence, and waiting 40 days to execute a search warrant at Seth Kenney’s PDQ Arm & Prop.
Secondly, ever heard of notice? The three categories of laws mentioned above come with their own notice requirements. See below regarding notice for NM Civil Rights Act claims. Regarding claims against the Sheriff’s Office and their officers, Baldwin had to give the state notice within a year. Surely Morrissey knows this as a career defense attorney who has previously worked on civil rights cases.
Instead, Morrissey via motions practice, portrayed the notice as some big bad retaliatory move by Baldwin while conveniently omitting any mention of notice requirements. She inappropriately included this information in motions knowing the media would repeat and spread her spin on what was likely legally required notice.
The media and misinformation spreaders ate it up and are still repeating this flawed take in 2025. To quote the misinformation repeat offender: “People need to stop weighing in on situations they’re unfamiliar with, or only have a cursory knowledge about.” Maybe take your own advice?
Misinformation: The timing of Troy Teske turning in ammo after HGR’s trial in March 2024 was fishy. He was some stranger trying to help out his best friend Thell Reed. Therefore Baldwin’s entire complaint is frivolous!
Talk about mental gymnastics. Detective Hancock and the prosecution knew about Troy Teske since at least November 1, 2021. A central recurring argument in Baldwin’s civil rights complaint is that prosecutors and the FJDA de-prioritized finding the source of the live ammo. Baldwin’s counsel argues this is part of why no one followed up with Teske back in 2021. They were certainly aware of Teske and his ammo before March 2024.
During a pretrial interview with Teske on November 2, 2023 Kari Morrissey told Teske to hold on to the ammo, that she would have it collected into evidence. I encourage everyone reading this to read the transcript from this interview. It’s included in the State’s Exhibits filed on 8/30/24 with Morrissey’s Motion to Reconsider.
Morrissey didn’t follow through nor did she have Hancock follow through. In January 2024 Morrissey decided not to collect the ammo and told HGR’s defense counsel to collect and test the evidence themselves. She did this with HGR’s trial just over a month away! They had relied on her collecting the evidence for two months. Then once it was too late she said nevermind and put the burden on the defense who was representing Hannah pro bono.
This is wrong in so many ways from both an evidence collection and prosecution perspective. In short, Troy Teske wasn’t just some random dude with random ammo who walked into the Sheriff’s Office after Hannah was found guilty. Law enforcement and the prosecution were well aware of him and his evidence for years which they avoided like the plague.
In my opinion, Teske’s ammo came with reasonable doubt that the prosecution was trying to avoid. If the live ammo on set came from someone other than Hannah that could lead to holes in the State’s theories at both trials.
Misinformation: Seth Kenney Got Immunity
No he didn’t. People need to stop saying this! The only person who signed a cooperation agreement with the prosecution is Sarah Zachry. The agreement was signed and filed on October 30, 2023. Why did it take two whole years for this? She tampered with evidence and threw out ammo minutes after Halyna was shot after a phone call with ammo supplier Seth Kenney. She actually tampered with evidence and the state didn’t do anything about it for over two years!
We were constantly reminded of Zachry’s agreement by Morrissey during HGR’s trial as she threatened to retract the agreement numerous times. Nothing of the sort was ever said to Seth Kenney nor was any such agreement ever shared in motions practice regarding Seth. If I missed something feel free to share.
Misinformation: Baldwin filed this complaint because he has a personal vendetta and is playing the victim. It’s about his bruised and fragile ego.
Actually, no. If anything he’s trying to recoup attorney’s fees. He’s also calling out alleged state approved misconduct at numerous levels, issues that are actively impacting New Mexicans every single day. The state botched this investigation and case every step of the way and few called them out on it until July 2024. This is also where the defamation claim comes into play.
District Attorney Mary Carmack-Altwies and former SP Andrea Reeb went on a media campaign dragging Baldwin on national TV. The prosecution paid their “expert” Bryan Carpenter $1,600 to give interviews vouching on their work on the case. As an “expert” on the State’s payroll he’s considered an arm of the prosecution. Much of what the three said did not serve any legitimate law enforcement or public interest purpose. In fact, their various interviews that aired on Fox News, CNN, and NBC News arguably broke numerous rules of professional conduct under New Mexico Law. See Rule 16–306 NMRA on trial publicity below.
We also have Rule 16–308 of the New Mexico rules that specifically cover special responsibilities of prosecutors. Do you think paying their “expert” $1,600 to be their cheerleader counts as “reasonable care” required below? What about their PR Representative Heather Brewer who in 2023 issued numerous statements taking personal jabs at Baldwin AND his lawyers? If the prosecutors can’t say certain things without getting in trouble under these rules then those rules are supposed to extend to their employees on the case. To date, NO ONE has been reprimanded for inappropriate interviews with the media at any point during the Rust cases.
In a way, Baldwin’s speaking up for others impacted by the broken NM criminal justice system. He’s arguably lost job opportunities and lots of money for lawyer’s fees as a result. It could be argued that he, along with his counsel, are speaking up on behalf of those similarly situated who can’t afford to take on the NM criminal justice system.
Misinformation: Defamation Claims and the DA’s Media Tour
View the above section on interviews with the media beyond the defamation lens. Prosecutors should not be allowed to flagrantly and repeatedly violate professional rules because some of what they say during inappropriate interviews is true. For example, sharing FBI report test results ahead of charging Baldwin is clearly forbidden by both the NM and ABA Model Rules of Professional Conduct. The fact those test results are true don’t mean it’s ok to ignore the rules governing attorneys and prosecutors.
Misinformation: The Grand Jury parts of the complaint don’t matter they were already litigated by Judge Mary Marlowe Sommer
Alec Baldwin’s counsel filed a mega Motion to Dismiss on March 14, 2024 following Baldwin’s Grand Jury Indictment. Included with the motion were voluminous exhibits and records of correspondence. Don’t quote me on this but I want to say it was nearly 1,000 pages. Mainstream media and certain Lawtubers cherry picked what to cover while ignoring key filings that were previously under seal. This includes parts of the GJ transcript that Baldwin refers to in the present complaint. Again, certain Lawtubers glossed over the transcripts initially so now they’re scratching their heads about certain references in the complaint.
Some preferred to focus on Morrissey’s outrageous Response that didn’t cite a single legal authority. See below for Team Baldwin’s reaction to Morrissey’s problematic Response:
As a result, critical issues and facts regarding the Grand Jury were glossed over or outright ignored by some covering this case. By focusing on Morrissey’s sensationalized motions, instead of the actual legal context and arguments, the media and Lawtubers played right into Morrissey’s hand. In my opinion, Morrissey wrote her motions with this sort of coverage and headlines in mind. I mean she is a career defense attorney after all. She knew what would get clicks and attention and it worked.
Now, with Baldwin’s civil rights complaint, people who barely touched the grand jury issues in 2024 are once again glossing over them because Judge Mary Marlowe Sommer ultimately denied Baldwin’s motion. I’d argue that Judge Ellington (the judge who oversaw the Grand Jury motions and drama) might actually disagree with the statement that Judge Mary “litigated” the Grand Jury issues.
What sort of important details were missed by those who glossed over Baldwin’s motions regarding the GJ?
- Judge Ellington had “deep concern” regarding Kari Morrissey’s actions on several occasions. For example, she (or someone working with the prosecution) improperly shared details about the grand jury with The New York Times. Morrissey was told not to talk to the media about the grand jury. An hour later she (or someone from her team) defied the judge and spoke with the media. Few, if any, instances of her questionable conduct were covered by the media and popular commentators.
- Only one single eyewitness who was in the chapel on October 21, 2021 was called by the State during the Grand Jury. Morrissey avoided any mention of Dave Halls and tried to redirect testimony when he was mentioned. This is particularly bizarre as he’s the only one who took a plea in this case. Usually when you have multiple defendants and one pleas you use them in your favor.
- Detective Hancock’s testimony at the Grand Jury conflicted with her statements made under oath during Hannah Gutierrez Reed’s trial. The same applies to Morrissey and statements she made during the two proceedings.
- State “expert” Bryan Carpenter (who has been paid tens of thousands of dollars by the State since 2022) allegedly misrepresented his qualifications before the Grand Jury. If you’ll recall, Carpenter was heavily involved in the initial 2023 charges against Baldwin. The media and Lawtubers have mostly been silent on his problematic role in this fiasco.
- Morrissey removed important language in Baldwin’s Grand Jury target letter but not HGR’s target letter. This directly conflicts with Morrissey’s argument that Baldwin was treated just like everyone else. Morrissey said she’d never seen the language removed from a target letter but she did it anyway. Just for Baldwin.
This list isn’t exhaustive by any means. If you have time I urge you to at least read the summary of the GJ issues in Baldwin’s complaint.
Misinformation: They only prosecuted Baldwin because he’s a Democrat and played Trump on SNL!
I cannot believe how many idiots continue to spread this narrative on Reddit. THE INCOMPETENT DA, JUST ELECTED FOR A SECOND TERM, IS A LOUD AND PROUD DEMOCRAT! Special Prosecutor Kari Morrissey is a Democrat! Santa Fe is incredibly liberal compared to other counties in New Mexico.
Lastly, supporting Baldwin’s civil rights complaint does not equate to being a Baldwin fan or paid PR shill! That’s a fact, not misinformation.
I support the Constitution. I support rules and guidelines the governement is expected to follow. Calling out misconduct doesn’t mean I’m on blowhole Baldwin’s payroll.
That said, this post is dedicated to my mentor and friend the late Dr. William J. Chambliss. It will be 11 years since his passing this February. If you’re interested in the subject of state organized crime and systemic corruption be sure to check out his work.
