Comments by "" (@grokitall) on "NewsNation" channel.

no he did not. he was charged with manslaughter due to one of the prosecutors deciding to only present evidence to their own colleagues which supported the charge. this then skewed the presentation of the case, and denied the defense the opportunity to choose their best defense. it also produced a great deal of prejudicial publicity which could cause problems with a retrial. dismissing the case due to failing to provide all the evidence to the defense was the right call, as the defense could argue for a mistrial on appeal. the prosecutor withholding the evidence should then go through sanctions procedures, and b3 referred to the bar to see if they are still fit to be a lawyer. in any case, it raises the possibility for the need to review every case she has been involved in to see if something similar happened, and every defence going forward will rightly challenge their presence and behaviour on any future prosecution the only remaining question is if the prejudicial coverage precludes a fair trial if they decide to retry the case, in which case no new trial should happen. he is not guilty of murder as there was no intent to kill. he is not guilty of manslaughter as any results of the case were invalid due to misconduct, and any conclusions based on that are dismissed. the only people looking good in this case are the prosecutor who resigned, and the judge who dismissed the case.
1
it matters because the defense could use the lack of clear marking of live and dummy ammunition could lead to live rounds being in a box of dummy ammunition. then the inexperience of the armourer could lead to those live rounds being in a gun which was said to be safe. then the inexperience of baldwin in handling live weapons could be used by the defense to present a case that he should not have been expected to know that a safe gun might not be. this is why the military in most countries has different loads being colour coded so you can tell at a glance what load you are using.
1