Alec Baldwin has taken legal action against prosecutors and investigators involved in the criminal case stemming from the tragic 2021 shooting on the set of the film Rust.
Filed in Santa Fe County District Court, Baldwin’s lawsuit accuses the parties of violating his civil rights, defaming him, and suppressing crucial evidence that could have bolstered his defense. Named in the suit are special prosecutor Kari Morrissey and members of the Santa Fe County Sheriff’s Office.
The lawsuit asserts that prosecutors unjustly conspired to charge Baldwin, disregarding proper legal protocols and intentionally withholding evidence that could have exonerated him. Baldwin contends these actions were part of an effort to cast him as a scapegoat for the accident that claimed the life of cinematographer Halyna Hutchins and injured director Joel Souza.
The actor’s legal filing suggests that the motivation behind these alleged actions was to shift blame onto him unfairly, further compounding the fallout from the tragic on-set incident.
In response, District Attorney Kari Morrissey stated to USA Today that they are prepared to contest the lawsuit and defend their actions in court. The Santa Fe County Sheriff’s Office has chosen not to provide any comment on the matter.
How did Baldwin’s case end in July?
The criminal case against Alec Baldwin was dismissed in the summer of 2024 after Judge Mary Marlowe Sommer determined that authorities had withheld critical information from Baldwin’s defense team. At the time, Baldwin’s legal counsel highlighted numerous irregularities in the criminal proceedings, asserting that these flaws had compromised the fairness of the trial.
Now, in his civil lawsuit, Baldwin is pursuing a jury trial, financial compensation for “injuries suffered,” and punitive damages. The lawsuit aims to hold those involved accountable for what Baldwin describes as a “malicious prosecution.”
While Baldwin acknowledges that no legal ruling can undo the emotional and psychological trauma he endured, he emphasizes that this action is intended to set a precedent to deter future judicial misconduct.
