Criminal jury convictions are hard won in many cases. Civil jury convictions are more easily won with a lower standard. A civil jury would award money easily. A criminal jury would have a harder time, because criminal liability is principally for those with the evil intent.
Gun accidents lack the intent.
It will be a battle of experts in part, and Baldwin will probably get a plea deal that represents the strength of the arguments, availability of evidence, and chance of trial. Besides the incredible amount of time and effort a trial like this would consume of the prosecution office resources.
Good criminal lawyers know how to test the State’s evidence, and prosecutors would rather have some justice over none.
He may walk again, but there is a good chance he takes a deal.
I agree that if you pick up a gun, you are and should be 100% responsible if someone is hurt or killed. If someone dies accidentally, somewhere you 100% failed to follow necessary rules. Criminal liability will usually attach in some way.
In this situation, there was likely no specific intent to cause the death.
The question is usually whether he was aware of the risk and acted grossly negligent or with reckless disregard.
Its hard to see how the jury would acquit except if they felt like he wasn’t aware of the risk of the discharge. The defense will likely focus on that portion. But, we are always left with the feeling that it was an accident and he isn’t a criminal with evil intent.
He probably knew the gun could kill (meaning he knew it was a real gun not a prop) so pointing it would seem to be enough to meet that he knew of the risk. But, that’s where the sticky part is, knowledge and intent.
I can see ways to argue this to a jury, and all a criminal defense attorney would have to do is convince one juror. It’s incredibly hard for some people to convict of a crime if they think it is a terrible accident and can’t find the immorality of the act. That is what I would argue and everything point to it just being a terrible accident, he is living with it, and no conviction would be necessary for rehabilitation, punishment to change his behavior, or justice “because he has already suffered enough and it will never happen again.”
I feel terrible for everyone touched by it, including Baldwin who probably has suffered from actually killing someone. Only true sociopaths are free from that type of feeling. I would follow the law and convict if appropriate, but I can see many people who couldn’t or wouldn’t do it.
There are crimes with strict liability, but discharging a firearm and causing death isn’t one of them. Even then juries won’t convict. The chance of acquittal is always there with a jury. It’s higher than most people think.