Alec Baldwin Freed on Prosecutorial Misconduct ft. ScowlOwl

preview_player
Показать описание

Welcome back to LegalEagle. The most avian legal analysis on the internets.

GOT A VIDEO IDEA? TELL ME!
▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀

MY COURSES
▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀

SOCIAL MEDIA & DISCUSSIONS
▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀

BUSINESS INQUIRIES
▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀

LEGAL-ISH DISCLAIMER
▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀
Sorry, occupational hazard: This is not legal advice, nor can I give you legal advice. I AM NOT YOUR LAWYER. Sorry! Everything here is for informational purposes only and not for the purpose of providing legal advice. You should contact your attorney to obtain advice with respect to any particular issue or problem. Nothing here should be construed to form an attorney-client relationship. Also, some of the links in this post may be affiliate links, meaning, at no cost to you, I will earn a small commission if you click through and make a purchase. But if you click, it really helps me make more of these videos! All non-licensed clips used for fair use commentary, criticism, and educational purposes. See Hosseinzadeh v. Klein, 276 F.Supp.3d 34 (S.D.N.Y. 2017); Equals Three, LLC v. Jukin Media, Inc., 139 F. Supp. 3d 1094 (C.D. Cal. 2015).

Special thanks:
Stock video and imagery provided by Getty Images and AP Archives
Music provided by Epidemic Sound
Maps provided by MapTiler/Geolayers
Рекомендации по теме
Комментарии
Автор

“The State has a clear duty to follow the law” is not something you want to have to remind prosecutors of…😮

venanziadorromatagni
Автор

I remember when people were angry that Bill Cosby was released due to prosecutorial misconduct. My thoughts then were the same as now: If you’re going to be mad at anyone, be mad at the prosecutor who acted ridiculously unethically. If we cannot rely on the state to act in the interests of our civil rights and civil liberties, then we are not a free nation.

_somerandomguyontheinternet_
Автор

I think establishing bad faith of the prosecutor is actually easier than the judge did it: If the ammunition truly had no evidentiary value to the defense team, then there is no reason _not_ to turn it over. "This evidence doesn't hurt my case at all, let's conceal it" is absurd on its face. In a perverse way, it may _help_ your case, because now the defense team has to consider evidence that isn't going to help them instead of focusing on what might.

I'll simply echo what Ms. Johnson said: It's not the prosecution's place to decide this.

xar
Автор

I think the biggest takeaway here is if the prosecutor thought they could get away with this against a major celebrity in the biggest case of their life ...

Just imagine everything theyve gotten away with against regular people in trials that will never see the light of day.

josephmatthews
Автор

That's crazy that they not only didn't turn over the evidence but went so far as to try and hide it under a different case to make sure they wouldn't be able to find it. Actually disgusting.

markymark
Автор

This is what happens when a prosecutor goes on a crusade, and believes the case will launch them to the bench, or into politics. Terrible misconduct. Some people need to go up before the Bar Association.

tgfabthunderbird
Автор

It's a red flag when prosecutors criticise "fancy" defense attorneys. Suggests some bone to pick and win, rather than blind justice.

wyskass
Автор

Baldwin didn't "point the gun in the direction of cinematographer Halyna Hutchins". He pointed it in the direction of the camera, because that was exactly what the script called for him to do in the scene. The scene was to show the shot from the point of view of the person being shot. Baldwin was practicing the precise action he was to do in the scene. Hutchins, as cinematographer, positioned herself behind the camera to see exactly what the camera would be capturing.

CrabbyOldLady
Автор

The complaint about his "fancy lawyers" getting him off just emphasizes how often they have done similar things and gotten away with it against less priveleged defendents.

elaine_of_shalott
Автор

This case is baffling to me. The prosecution hides evidence, thinks that's fine. Prosecution _destroys_ the gun in testing, then decides to rebuild it with new parts and confidently announces it's the same as when it was fired. Prosecution decides the actor who fired the gun on a western movie set (where prop guns are commonly fired at people) should go to jail.
Every step you go backward makes the case look even more insane. Thank the ethical prosecutor who stepped down and the judge who threw it out.
Imagine the number of cases where such misconduct isn't brought to light.

danielhale
Автор

an explosive hearing is an understatement. The judge was beyond pissed off and the hearing wasn't some little hour long hearing. It took an entire day, the judge had to take a 20 minute break so she could compose herself, the prosecutor took the stand. The judge made up her mind after seeing the bullets that got turned over. That hearing was amazing to watch. and that was after the defense had a MASSIVE L the day before.

andreapayneconnally
Автор

In Orange County, California, a few years ago several prosecutors lied to the presiding judge in the Dekraai mass murder case, which was a slam-dunk for the DA but they broke the law to win it and then lied about it. The judge called them on that, called them liars to their faces, and then recused the entire District Attorney's Office of Orange County from prosecuting the death penalty phase for the defendant Dekraai. The then-OCDA threw a hissy fit and had the judge permanently "papered, " that is, he would not be accepted as a judge by any Deputy District Attorney in the County. So the best and most senior judge in OC at the time spent more than one year with zero (0) cases, frozen by a disgusting, vendetta-pursuing DA and his set of entitled liars. California governor Jerry Brown eventually promoted the judge to the California Court of Appeals. It was an honor to know you and to have worked (not as an attorney) in cases you presided, Justice Thomas Goethals. Respect

sidgen
Автор

Props to Johnson. Ethical behavior is what separates the strong societies from the weak, and she showed a lot of strength and courage in that situation.

liamhome
Автор

I am neither american nor a lawyer, but I found this argument "the armorer was a young woman, so Baldwin should have second guessed her" horrendous. Not at least, because that is a horrible look for the male lead to not trust any of the presumptive experts on set

victorolosaurus
Автор

this wasn't the first time that person logged evidence under the wrong case number on purpose. That person should be seeing jail time

tomservo
Автор

there's also the irony of the prosecution charging that the defense attorneys are the big fancy lawyers, implying that they are corrupt / dishonest, while themselves happily engaging in corruption and dishonesty

ItWasSaucerShaped
Автор

I highly respect Johnson for dropping out of the case when she learned about the hidden evidence. It’s utterly disgusting that the state would do such a thing, when they should be looking to ensure that justice and the rule of law are upheld. We need stronger punishments for blatantly corrupt acts like this

omegamkx
Автор

And of course, the Prosecutors who withheld evidence (thereby committing Tampering with Evidence, Deprivation of Rights under the Color of Law and Conspiracy against Rights), will not face criminal charges.

bikkiikun
Автор

The attitude of Poppel and Morrissey was absolutely disgusting. They were smirking, rolling eyes, and deliberately having zero recollection to the point of contempt. The right decision was made. I hope they are sued.

planespeaking
Автор

Read something that was like "any time you see police or prosecutors complain about how a defense attorney got the defendant off on a technicality, remember that that technicality only exists overwhelmingly because the state didn't do its job correctly". Those "technicalities" exist to protect citizens from government overreach (re: attacking citizens criticizing the government). In order to prove the state is not giving preferential treatment to some, these "technicalities" Need to exist for *everyone* at *All* times.

contortionyx