Her talking about finding medical errors while also saying "but I don't treat patients" reminded me of that: What is the difference between a Doctor of Internal Medicine, a Surgeon and a Pathologist? The Internal Medicine Doc knows everything but can do nothing. The Surgeon knows nothing but can do everything. The Pathologist knows everything and can do everything but it's of no use to the patient anymore.
That makes no sense, pathologists study tissue samples from living people all the time. In fact they are the ones who tell you if you have anything you need to treat, so they are of incredible use.
@@ffs6158 Leave it to UA-cam Comments to overanalyze a Joke and suck the fun out of everything by passive-aggressively implying that one is incredibly disparaging 🙄 Should I have specified "Pathologists working as Medical Examiners" to really kill the joke? Also: Did you know that Surgeons know how to operate and IM does treat patients so it makes no sense for you to specifically point out pathologists unless you want to imply, that IM Docs and Surgeons are not of incredible use...? And before you answer, this seems necessary: **** DISCLAIMER **** This comment contains jokes and rhetorical questions. They are intended to convey my thoughts and underpin my argumentative position of: "This was an old Joke I was reminded of. Obviously a Joke does not necessarily contain facts."
@@Marcel_AugustinWell, I 😂! I want you to make a veterinarian joke too as in we wear every single one of these hats including a dentist. In a zombie apocalypse you want a vet as we even do multiple species 😂
I stumbled upon EDB's channel accidentally this week and I'm so glad I did! I love watching trials but have wished I had my own personal court translator. Boom! Got it!
Welcome to the Lawnerd Community it's the best place on S Media. Emily is awesome and if you don't catch the live, you are welcome in the Replay Crew. 💚☘️🇮🇪
She’s the best- we were lucky to find her during the Depp trial!! If you haven’t watched that one yet- oh boy you better out that in your watchlist 😂 sure it’s 2.5 years old but it is still top notch entertaining!
Tons of people out there are saying Hannah did nothing wrong and it's all Alecs fault. Some even saying he loaded the live round himself. Absolutely insane.
Some people want to hear what is going on in court and they need less commentary for that, sometimes disabilities dictate that need. What I found interesting today particularly is that historically EDB wants others to give her grace for her disabilities but are rough on others for potentially theirs. Shrug.
Question: do you think they decided to prosecute her so that they have a whole practice run for the Baldwin one? He’ll probably have some pretty slick lawyers. And a lot of them!!
Hey Emily 👋 love your show! I am not a law nerd by profession but rather a seeker of justice and knowledge. I sat as a juror twice, and it opened my eyes to judiciary process etc. It's where the facts come to light. I find trials fascinating but lack law knowledge, so I wanted to say I totally appreciate the commentary and explanations. I want facts not fuckery and I am here for it! Love the sass and the snark....and all of the things😆 ❤
36:50 *OMG* The intubation was ectopic- that is one of the most dangerous and egregious errors possible in intubation! It’s actually quite uncommon but carries a high risk of morbidity and mortality. Not only is it unable to do its job by oxygenating the lungs, it actually occludes the airway by displacement (the esophagus is posterior to the bronchial tract) towards the anterior. The balloon that is inflated after placement is normally the prevent dislodging and if inflated in the esophagus the airway is crushed. It is also a very high risk for aspiration of gastric acid and via this type of error if aspiration occurs it is severe. I don’t think aspiration occurred here I think it was hypovolemic shock and anoxia but knowing that zero oxygen was being pumped into her lungs makes me unable to rule out iatrogenic error.
Wow, for her, the medical examiner, even I know that her saying that it was accidental by "reading" the situation where she was not present. I'm so surprised, hmmm so EDB didn't say she'd say that that should be objected to, I wish I was on the live chat to ask her about doing so.
With a lung injury and the amount of blood in the chest cavity, it is difficult to verify the tube placement. The normal things we look and listen for to verify correct placement might not be possible.
Not all states require the actual proffering a witness as an expert. Once the proper foundation has been laid, you can just ask those questions. I’m a prosecutor in NY and we don’t have to formally offer a witness as an expert.
I don't feel comfortable joining your chats yet - but I have been watching and loving your videos since Heard & Brooks - I believe my opinion is in the minority and I'm not prepared for the backlash I have seen on other chat groups to people who strongly disagree. I feel terrible for this young woman who I believe was thrown into a job she was not qualified for but "fit the budget" and this was all a horrific tragic accident. I cannot - at this point see any intent and do not understand how they could charge her - is she facing prison for this???
The chat is heavily modded and people are really nice so I wouldn’t worry about being pounced on. They take a lot of pride in being a friendly and welcoming chat. If they disagree they do their best to be respectful so I would t worry. I’m usually in the replay crew due to my schedule or I’d hop in too
No one thinks she had intent. She's charged with involuntary manslaughter, intent would be murder. It does suck for her, but after watching the testimony, I , a complete gun hater, know how to distinguish dummies from live rounds. Like EDB, I believe Dave Halls should be facing more charges. Welcome to the chat!
My issue with it is she was a part time armor. She had eight days to do her armor duty. She had already finished her armorer duty. She. And the management, producers, whatever had discussed that and they told her they would not give her any more armor or time. The other two accidental discharges were from Sarah Zachary loading and unloading the weapon. How is it this girl is being charged when she was technically a prop person and was not the armor? Her boss told her you are not the armor right now. Leave the set. That is a problem. How is she being charged in? Sarah Zachary is not because she was the one that loaded and unloaded. The other two weapons that accidentally discharged, she is the one that emptied that gun and threw away the bullets. She is the one that ran around throwing away evidence, but yet she is not being charged with evidence tampering. She's not being charged with manslaughter. She's not being charged with absolutely anything. It makes no sense why this girl is being charged when she was in fact a prop person and was told by her boss to leave the area because she in fact was not the armor that day. It makes no sense to me. So I feel you on that BUT I have been with Emily for a while now. I absolutely love her watching her, and that is one thing I can tell you is they don't pounce on you in the chat. They're very nice, very friendly, very accepting of all points of view. (Sorry for any mistakes I'm using talk to text while cooking dinner lol)
Kass- I agree with you. I suspect they chose her BECAUSE she was cheap and unlikely to challenge them in their hurry, hurry, lax crap. If it weren't for her father being in the business, I'd wonder if she had enough experience to understand how easily things can go wrong.
@@sherryernst9901This - all of it. I already came up with at least 5 different scenarios of what happened from pretty much the get go. So far it's impossible to find Hannah guilty beyond a reasonable doubt in my opinion. It also makes me wonder if anyone from law enforcement and prosecution even considered that this could have been a murder case - not even necessarily with Helena as the intended victim but for example Jensen Ackles or someone else having been the intended target? Was that even investigated? I hope defence will be bringing that up. It's probably one of the best things to bring up in order to get a not guilty verdict from the jury. From what I have heard so far about Sarah I wouldn't trust her for one second in my life and in my opinion she should be sitting where Hannah is sitting. The tampering with evidence charge against Hannah is ridiculous at best and it doesn't actually really matter if she was high on drugs or not IF prosecution was actually sure that she was the armourer that day and that there was negligence on her part. This charge should have definitely been brought against Sarah - no matter who prosecution wanted to go after. It's not something that should get anyone off with a slap on the wrist or less. This was after all tampering with the most important piece of evidence in this case! I'm also not happy with who prosecution decided to make a deal with and who not to prosecute. It's just wrong and not in the best interest of the public in my opinion. I also don't like the "aggressive" undertone from the prosecution woman. It feels like she's too emotionally invested and takes things personally somehow. I already didn't like her before the trial started and it seemed like she has some sort of beef with the defence team. I can't imagine that blowing up in front of the jury did her any favours, no matter the context...
1:57:00 - wasn’t there boxes from pdq that were like that though? Wouldn’t that suggest that they weren’t very professional and could have supplied rust with the mixed boxes too? Sorry but until they show that she definitely brought the ammo herself to set I am going to assume that the place all other ammo came from also supplied the lives and mixes boxes.
EDB: Every morning, while watching, I have to resubscribe. Then, on the afternoon stream, I have to resubscribe again. Please ask your UA-cam connections wtf is happening. You'd probably be at 1M subscribers if YT wasn't fucking around.
I don't understand why all the gun testimony is happening during this trial. I thought this trial would focus on how live ammo got on set and how it was loaded into the gun.
Yeah. This is strange. It should be classified as death by gunshot and then leave intent up to the investigators and prosecutors. Like death caused by friendly fire wouldn't necessarily be labeled a homicide. She should just be identifying what killed Hutchins.
If Lucien was 22 in 1963 when he got his credentials from Berkeley, he's 83 years old. Next time someone uses age to explain someone's incompetence, remember this guy.
EDB, I’m kind of curious if you ever get comments back from the lawyers you live critique. I find it fascinating to hear your comments, and personally would welcome any expert’s critique of one of my presentations. Then again, I’m an apparel designer, so my presentations are mainly about garments and art (edit: pattern). 😂
1:03:03 😂when Emily goes off about them being qualified an expert or not and the DA is just fucking around.... It makes me giggle 😂 then the judge is on Emily's page and it's fantastic
Spent a week at the American Academy of Forensic Sciences conference. It's an awesome experience. Pretty much everyone there is an uber law nerd. Met lots of EDB fans!
I'm only watching now, and I stayed away so I didn't see the result, but so far I'm more and more convinced Hannah shouldn't be on trial. If I hire 2 people to do the electrical work at my house, one supervises and the one who does the work is saying things are rushed, but the supervisor brushes it off, at this point, even I am more guilty for seeing something sus and letting it go on, than the person who is clearly pressured into doing a sensitive job badly... if I switch a light on and die, I'm mad at the supervisor, not the incompetent easily pressured person. Hannah was convincing no one she was competent. To trust she is doing her job securing the weapons is a complete disregard to self-protection instincts, it's putting the job first, it's willful ignorance.
Absolutely agree Emily, I’ve never heard of an ME finding intent Very odd Wonder if this judge thinks it’s recorded and then put online rather than LIVE streamed 😂 Giving the instructions not to publish autopsy photos at the end of the testimony 🤦🏼♀️ Lucky the media knows not to show any actual photos
Know this is old but just watching it now. While i understand Hannah's role in this as suggested by the prosecutors part of me wonders if this is truly justice to prosecute someone when there is an accident that cant 100% be proven to be due to neglect/negligence ie if there is a doubt or question as to how the bullets got on set im not entirely sure how i feel about significant charges being brought. I know its kinda strange given the facts of this case but having experienced the tendency of over charging of our judicial system its hard not to have a negative opinion
She's also judging this as not by negligence. Not her job. If they want to leave homicide out, she just literally determines how the person died and leave the rest to the investigation and prosecutors. This declaration by accident would be a problem. For most manslaughter and homicide cases. She's not an investigator.
One of the ADs (in the cabin with Hannah) was a rifle, possibly the lever-action they’ve talked about. The other was Sarah Zachary, but I can’t remember which gun it was.
I wish i was not so far behind the live trial but getting there defiantly seems to have an almost pesdup like baldwin trail to this...hopefully not too much more around this asepct of things because i feel they have sufficnetly proven via experts gun does not go boom apart from in 2 sistuations. 1 - trigger pull 2 - known defect that with the right knock in resting posistion a full 6 rounds might cause a chamber to go off...this being a known defect of the model. This is also somethign that is wierd to me if it has this known issue why would they keep loading with six why not only every load 5 at most...i am not sure the prosecution has picked up on this and yet it is more evidence of recklessness
Yep. I was shown how to do CPR on a medical dummy once, and the energy required for me to get relatively close to accurate (I think I was 70-75% effective) was insane. I cannot imagine trying to do CPR on someone without breaking ribs 😮.
One thing I like about these trials is I get to see experts in fields I didn't even know existed. Especially female experts! It's exciting to see other women in male dominated fields.
1:05:10 EBD that’s why we love watching your court feeds: you call it as you see it and use the cursy words. You may feel it would make you a” terrible judge“ (not sure I totally agree with your assessment) but you’re an awesome law nerd UA-camr! ❤
If you watched The Staircase about the guy connected with two deaths by staircase, you saw the defense attorney flip out when the coroner determined the death was a "homicide" and the judge overruled his objection. He understood that it was the jury's job to determine whether the manner of death was homicide. In the documentary, he said he was quitting his practice as a result.
Watching her interviews, she impresses as a "teenager" playing armorer instead of taking her job seriously. She had no training but her father who missed the priority for his job in training her, RESPONSIBILITY. She wasn't even in the union, nothing. Her lazy and unprofessional,attitude and blowing everything off was incredible with a woman dead. It's as bad as Baldwin's sociopathic lies and disregard for the woman he killed, not even mentioning her name in the 20-20 interview. What a crew. That's Hollywood?
What if? It’s not like they have any proof of that. More likely Hannah was more focused on being the cool kid and doing lines of coke while taking selfies with guns… than being a responsible armorer. After all, she was supposed to shake each bullet before loading them and instead she shook the entire box 🤦🏻♀️, so one real bullet that doesn’t make noise in a sea of BB’s isn’t exactly gunna be noticed. I mean, she stored loose bullets in a f’n Fanny pack!! Of course they got mixed up! How real rounds got on set is that she accidentally brought them and none of her half-as’d safety checks caught her mistake. Can we stop with the conspiracy theories now?
I wonder if they didn’t allow the reporters during the autopsy testimony and pictures so that wouldn’t have an issue!! Hahha you just said this as I was typing it
From a scientific perspective, I would have thought that the ME would have based her decision for COD on the evidence/condition of the deceased and not on the situation leading up to the death. Seems to me like she let the situation dictate her findings rather than relying on hard evidence within her scope of duty.
Which is not fact. He said that to get out of being charged, and the ME is supposed to take his word as fact? The point is- when you are dealing with a firearm it’s never accidental. It’s either murder or it’s wreck less disregard for safety.
My 'spidey sense' was tingling when the prosecutor showed those unredacted text message documents in court the other day. Something about the way that went down felt like she has a personal agenda when it comes to how video cameras in the courtroom impact her job and she did that to prove a point. I hope my instincts are off but something about it still isn't sitting right with me.
I understand what you are saying, but my mind wonders, under discovery, the defence also has copies of all evidence that will be presented. Both the defence and the prosecution are equally at fault that unredacted private information was released. The prosecution did present the evidence in court, but they are equally at fault for not ensuring private information was redacted.
@supergran62 Is each team independently responsible for redacting documents they enter into evidence during trial? Do they share access to a singular source of documentation evidence or each have their own copies?
Doesn't hame much to do with Hannah?! This feels very much like a trial run for Baldwins case. Like prosecution is testing out how a jury reacts to all their arguments.
I thought over and over why didn’t the medics take her the hospital. They kept waiting to stabilize her. Why couldn’t they just take her to proper emergency room and get her the help she needed. And heating this testimony makes me think it even more.
This is what first responders do to give her a fighting chance. She would have needed to go to a specialist emergency trauma centre, not just a small hospital with limited resources.
It’s procedure, think of the chaos that would come with trying to move a patient that’s still bleeding heavily into a helicopter. And if they get her in, imagine the chaos of trying to stabilize them in the tiny space of the helicopter. They have to stabilize to ensure she gets to the hospital alive.
I do think Hannah was put in a difficult position but I think if she took her job seriously enough or fully appreciated it’s importance she wouldn’t have stayed with the production. Easier said than done, but I think she and others have to take responsibility for this tragedy.
again, i mean yes, there never should have been a live round on set BUT even more doubt as to who caused the death is there - intubated wrong - over an hour before they got her to the hospital = severe blood loss... so many factors here - its difficult for me to hold only Hannah responsible - should she be punished probably but i dont feel to this extent. the defense is doing a great job at causing doubt.
@@garykidson4489all I'm saying is the defense has so far, in my opinion, done a good job to poke holes and make this not BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT for me. i have reasonable doubt. if i were on the jury there are too many other factors (including a friggin guy who plead who needed to take so much more responsibility than 6 months probation) where i could not feel comfortable holding only Hannah responsible. Circumstances 100% matter... that's why sometimes they wont charge someone who caused a traffic accident if the circumstances were of such a nature that they couldn't hold the driver responsible. if the circumstances on the set were so bad it creates doubt in my mind and therefor i would not be able to vote guilty. each to his own tho.
Criminology degreed person here (not practicing as a criminologist currently, I’m a supervising stock broker. 😂) Yeah, Hi! That’s definitely weird to me too, Emily. The teetering of discipline for “volitional act” seems to be a bit too much of her being an investigator. Pick a lane New Mexico MEs. Pick. A. Lane.
I’m fairly certain it happens mostly in smaller jurisdictions where the city/town doesn’t have enough manpower to prosecute a large case. But it might happen in other circumstances? Santa Fe is def on the smaller side especially for THIS case.
Her talking about finding medical errors while also saying "but I don't treat patients" reminded me of that:
What is the difference between a Doctor of Internal Medicine, a Surgeon and a Pathologist?
The Internal Medicine Doc knows everything but can do nothing.
The Surgeon knows nothing but can do everything.
The Pathologist knows everything and can do everything but it's of no use to the patient anymore.
That makes no sense, pathologists study tissue samples from living people all the time. In fact they are the ones who tell you if you have anything you need to treat, so they are of incredible use.
@@ffs6158 Leave it to UA-cam Comments to overanalyze a Joke and suck the fun out of everything by passive-aggressively implying that one is incredibly disparaging 🙄
Should I have specified "Pathologists working as Medical Examiners" to really kill the joke?
Also: Did you know that Surgeons know how to operate and IM does treat patients so it makes no sense for you to specifically point out pathologists unless you want to imply, that IM Docs and Surgeons are not of incredible use...?
And before you answer, this seems necessary:
**** DISCLAIMER ****
This comment contains jokes and rhetorical questions.
They are intended to convey my thoughts and underpin my argumentative position of:
"This was an old Joke I was reminded of. Obviously a Joke does not necessarily contain facts."
@@Marcel_AugustinWell, I 😂! I want you to make a veterinarian joke too as in we wear every single one of these hats including a dentist. In a zombie apocalypse you want a vet as we even do multiple species 😂
@Marcel_Augustin maybe add an emoji to indicate you are joking.
I stumbled upon EDB's channel accidentally this week and I'm so glad I did! I love watching trials but have wished I had my own personal court translator. Boom! Got it!
EDB is awesome glad u found her.
Yasssss welcome!!
So happy you found EDB💜 she’s amazing, super smart, witty, so much fun to watch trials with.
Welcome to the Lawnerd Community it's the best place on S Media. Emily is awesome and if you don't catch the live, you are welcome in the Replay Crew. 💚☘️🇮🇪
She’s the best- we were lucky to find her during the Depp trial!! If you haven’t watched that one yet- oh boy you better out that in your watchlist 😂 sure it’s 2.5 years old but it is still top notch entertaining!
They're so focused on Baldwin it almost feels like the prosecution of Hannah is an afterthought to them and it doesn't sit well with me.
Tons of people out there are saying Hannah did nothing wrong and it's all Alecs fault. Some even saying he loaded the live round himself. Absolutely insane.
Confused by anyone not here for Emily’s commentary 😂
At this point its just attention seeking when people complain. Most of us are here because of the commentary.
Exactly! Makes no sense.
Watching this by itself would be so boring. I like the explanations and commentary
If they don’t want commentary they can go to court tv
Some people want to hear what is going on in court and they need less commentary for that, sometimes disabilities dictate that need. What I found interesting today particularly is that historically EDB wants others to give her grace for her disabilities but are rough on others for potentially theirs. Shrug.
I’ve often wondered where the term “going off half-cocked” came from. Now I know.
Question: do you think they decided to prosecute her so that they have a whole practice run for the Baldwin one? He’ll probably have some pretty slick lawyers. And a lot of them!!
Hey Emily 👋 love your show! I am not a law nerd by profession but rather a seeker of justice and knowledge. I sat as a juror twice, and it opened my eyes to judiciary process etc. It's where the facts come to light. I find trials fascinating but lack law knowledge, so I wanted to say I totally appreciate the commentary and explanations. I want facts not fuckery and I am here for it! Love the sass and the snark....and all of the things😆 ❤
36:50 *OMG* The intubation was ectopic- that is one of the most dangerous and egregious errors possible in intubation! It’s actually quite uncommon but carries a high risk of morbidity and mortality.
Not only is it unable to do its job by oxygenating the lungs, it actually occludes the airway by displacement (the esophagus is posterior to the bronchial tract) towards the anterior. The balloon that is inflated after placement is normally the prevent dislodging and if inflated in the esophagus the airway is crushed.
It is also a very high risk for aspiration of gastric acid and via this type of error if aspiration occurs it is severe. I don’t think aspiration occurred here I think it was hypovolemic shock and anoxia but knowing that zero oxygen was being pumped into her lungs makes me unable to rule out iatrogenic error.
i need a compilation of all of the innuendos from these streams
You said innuendo. 😂
Replay crew!! Watching this at 1.75x speed so I can try and catch up to this afternoon live. Hope everyone is having a good day 💜💜
@creeknativegirl lol, I have it on "normal" and boy, everybody's talking so fast!!
@@marysalvi242 surprisingly I was actually able to understand everyone I was shocked. First time I’ve done that lol.
Same!! 1.75 is perfect for this!!
I try to tell people that you get used to the speed if you're actually listening to it.
@@LisaPFrampton it really is as long as your listening. Just takes a minute to get used to it
I feel you! Currently doing the same on x2. I guess our brains are built differently haha
Wow, for her, the medical examiner, even I know that her saying that it was accidental by "reading" the situation where she was not present. I'm so surprised, hmmm so EDB didn't say she'd say that that should be objected to, I wish I was on the live chat to ask her about doing so.
Why wouldn’t it be an accident, no one being prosecuted for murder of course its an accident imo.
With a lung injury and the amount of blood in the chest cavity, it is difficult to verify the tube placement. The normal things we look and listen for to verify correct placement might not be possible.
Yes. Coming to say this!!!
I winder if Ross didn’t walk off because he was friends with the victim and felt loyalty to her.
Not all states require the actual proffering a witness as an expert. Once the proper foundation has been laid, you can just ask those questions. I’m a prosecutor in NY and we don’t have to formally offer a witness as an expert.
I think the focus on Baldwin is relevant because training the actors in gun safety IS part of Hannah's job.
Good point
I don't feel comfortable joining your chats yet - but I have been watching and loving your videos since Heard & Brooks - I believe my opinion is in the minority and I'm not prepared for the backlash I have seen on other chat groups to people who strongly disagree. I feel terrible for this young woman who I believe was thrown into a job she was not qualified for but "fit the budget" and this was all a horrific tragic accident. I cannot - at this point see any intent and do not understand how they could charge her - is she facing prison for this???
The chat is heavily modded and people are really nice so I wouldn’t worry about being pounced on. They take a lot of pride in being a friendly and welcoming chat. If they disagree they do their best to be respectful so I would t worry. I’m usually in the replay crew due to my schedule or I’d hop in too
No one thinks she had intent. She's charged with involuntary manslaughter, intent would be murder. It does suck for her, but after watching the testimony, I , a complete gun hater, know how to distinguish dummies from live rounds. Like EDB, I believe Dave Halls should be facing more charges. Welcome to the chat!
My issue with it is she was a part time armor. She had eight days to do her armor duty. She had already finished her armorer duty. She. And the management, producers, whatever had discussed that and they told her they would not give her any more armor or time. The other two accidental discharges were from Sarah Zachary loading and unloading the weapon. How is it this girl is being charged when she was technically a prop person and was not the armor? Her boss told her you are not the armor right now. Leave the set. That is a problem. How is she being charged in? Sarah Zachary is not because she was the one that loaded and unloaded. The other two weapons that accidentally discharged, she is the one that emptied that gun and threw away the bullets. She is the one that ran around throwing away evidence, but yet she is not being charged with evidence tampering. She's not being charged with manslaughter. She's not being charged with absolutely anything. It makes no sense why this girl is being charged when she was in fact a prop person and was told by her boss to leave the area because she in fact was not the armor that day. It makes no sense to me. So I feel you on that BUT I have been with Emily for a while now. I absolutely love her watching her, and that is one thing I can tell you is they don't pounce on you in the chat. They're very nice, very friendly, very accepting of all points of view.
(Sorry for any mistakes I'm using talk to text while cooking dinner lol)
Kass- I agree with you. I suspect they chose her BECAUSE she was cheap and unlikely to challenge them in their hurry, hurry, lax crap. If it weren't for her father being in the business, I'd wonder if she had enough experience to understand how easily things can go wrong.
@@sherryernst9901This - all of it. I already came up with at least 5 different scenarios of what happened from pretty much the get go. So far it's impossible to find Hannah guilty beyond a reasonable doubt in my opinion.
It also makes me wonder if anyone from law enforcement and prosecution even considered that this could have been a murder case - not even necessarily with Helena as the intended victim but for example Jensen Ackles or someone else having been the intended target? Was that even investigated? I hope defence will be bringing that up. It's probably one of the best things to bring up in order to get a not guilty verdict from the jury.
From what I have heard so far about Sarah I wouldn't trust her for one second in my life and in my opinion she should be sitting where Hannah is sitting. The tampering with evidence charge against Hannah is ridiculous at best and it doesn't actually really matter if she was high on drugs or not IF prosecution was actually sure that she was the armourer that day and that there was negligence on her part.
This charge should have definitely been brought against Sarah - no matter who prosecution wanted to go after. It's not something that should get anyone off with a slap on the wrist or less. This was after all tampering with the most important piece of evidence in this case!
I'm also not happy with who prosecution decided to make a deal with and who not to prosecute. It's just wrong and not in the best interest of the public in my opinion. I also don't like the "aggressive" undertone from the prosecution woman. It feels like she's too emotionally invested and takes things personally somehow. I already didn't like her before the trial started and it seemed like she has some sort of beef with the defence team. I can't imagine that blowing up in front of the jury did her any favours, no matter the context...
Part of the replay crew again!! 💟
How old does that make the gun expert? OMG he’s doing well.a very interesting man. I want to sit next to him at a dinner party.
1:57:00 - wasn’t there boxes from pdq that were like that though? Wouldn’t that suggest that they weren’t very professional and could have supplied rust with the mixed boxes too? Sorry but until they show that she definitely brought the ammo herself to set I am going to assume that the place all other ammo came from also supplied the lives and mixes boxes.
I have been trying to catch up for 3 days... hopefully today I can finally get there.
@clintwilkinson8816 this is my first watching. Not sure, I'm even going to try and catch up..I'll see. Good luck!
So hard to catch up with live trials!! GL
Do u watch @ 1.5x if not try that and watch twice as much stuff because it goes in half the time @ 1.5x speed ;)
Yes, I do. So when EDB speeds up her feed it goes even faster. LOL
I can’t stop looking at Hannah’s legal counsel to the left of her, she’s so pretty and always serving looks!
EDB: Every morning, while watching, I have to resubscribe. Then, on the afternoon stream, I have to resubscribe again. Please ask your UA-cam connections wtf is happening. You'd probably be at 1M subscribers if YT wasn't fucking around.
I believe this! I have had to resubscribe to many of my favs lately. They’re trying not to pay I bet you
@@Lei-AICPhD Yes, I could understand if it was a channel I don't watch often, but I'm on EDB all the time. Stop fucking around, UA-cam!
I don't understand why all the gun testimony is happening during this trial. I thought this trial would focus on how live ammo got on set and how it was loaded into the gun.
burning the lede perhaps or it’s possible they don’t know how it made its way onto the set. if HG didn’t do it who’d want to implicate themselves?
Replay crew here watching at 1.75x … compounding the 1.25x EBD is running… Oh, how happy my ADHD mind 🤘💜💯
This defense attorney needs his own channel. His voice isunique to me, clear and very pleasing.
I don’t get how LawTube maintains channels AND practices law. Emily is retired form that but the rest… I don’t know how they find the time!
Yeah. This is strange. It should be classified as death by gunshot and then leave intent up to the investigators and prosecutors. Like death caused by friendly fire wouldn't necessarily be labeled a homicide. She should just be identifying what killed Hutchins.
Why are we bothering with a court case then if the determination was made in the ME lab?
It's strange that the ME determines this. I think she's made an error...some paid her off 😅
If Lucien was 22 in 1963 when he got his credentials from Berkeley, he's 83 years old. Next time someone uses age to explain someone's incompetence, remember this guy.
🎉🎉Best ADHD explanation ever: “I must multitask while being talked to or I can’t pay attention! But don’t multitask while I’m talking to you!”
Love your commentary Emily - very enjoyable ❤
Emily I am going to repeat if the hammer is down and all six rounds are in the gun, the firing pin is resting on the primer, a bump will make it fire.
Yes! She keeps missing this point!
Hannah doesn’t want the lawyer that wanted out even talking to her. I doubt that is money. It seems deeper
Sorry I have been trying to catch up which one is that
@@Serenity888Meowit’s at about 1:08:00
What’s the defense attorney situation again? I’m confused by the lawyers at the table.
EDB, I’m kind of curious if you ever get comments back from the lawyers you live critique. I find it fascinating to hear your comments, and personally would welcome any expert’s critique of one of my presentations. Then again, I’m an apparel designer, so my presentations are mainly about garments and art (edit: pattern). 😂
ME is way overstepping with her guessing intent as a major reason for manner of death. This feels wrong!
1:03:03 😂when Emily goes off about them being qualified an expert or not and the DA is just fucking around.... It makes me giggle 😂 then the judge is on Emily's page and it's fantastic
Really enjoying this witness’s necklace too!!!
I really dont get why some people complain about having commentary on a litrally commentary channel🤷♀️ lol
Spent a week at the American Academy of Forensic Sciences conference. It's an awesome experience. Pretty much everyone there is an uber law nerd. Met lots of EDB fans!
Lasted until almost the morning break on live. Now back on replay crew.
I'm only watching now, and I stayed away so I didn't see the result, but so far I'm more and more convinced Hannah shouldn't be on trial. If I hire 2 people to do the electrical work at my house, one supervises and the one who does the work is saying things are rushed, but the supervisor brushes it off, at this point, even I am more guilty for seeing something sus and letting it go on, than the person who is clearly pressured into doing a sensitive job badly... if I switch a light on and die, I'm mad at the supervisor, not the incompetent easily pressured person. Hannah was convincing no one she was competent. To trust she is doing her job securing the weapons is a complete disregard to self-protection instincts, it's putting the job first, it's willful ignorance.
Supposed to be working . . .but this is so interesting
Emily, for the next video can you enable CCs for the court video? It's not loading on your videos through YT. Thank you!
Absolutely agree Emily, I’ve never heard of an ME finding intent
Very odd
Wonder if this judge thinks it’s recorded and then put online rather than LIVE streamed 😂
Giving the instructions not to publish autopsy photos at the end of the testimony 🤦🏼♀️
Lucky the media knows not to show any actual photos
lol yeah she has clearly never had a case where Court TV came a knockin’! 😂 and she probably doesn’t use UA-cam much either lol
Judge Sommer reminds me of a Gelfling, so I've been thinking of her as Judge Maudra.
PDF highlight tool set to black on max opacity = perfect redactions everytime. There ya go, prosectuion, in case you were struggling lol
Know this is old but just watching it now. While i understand Hannah's role in this as suggested by the prosecutors part of me wonders if this is truly justice to prosecute someone when there is an accident that cant 100% be proven to be due to neglect/negligence ie if there is a doubt or question as to how the bullets got on set im not entirely sure how i feel about significant charges being brought. I know its kinda strange given the facts of this case but having experienced the tendency of over charging of our judicial system its hard not to have a negative opinion
Gun expert is a classic 1950s gentleman. What a man.
I love your commentary. You make court make sense and I love watching court with you.
She's also judging this as not by negligence. Not her job. If they want to leave homicide out, she just literally determines how the person died and leave the rest to the investigation and prosecutors. This declaration by accident would be a problem. For most manslaughter and homicide cases. She's not an investigator.
I'm on the rewatch crew. Just loving your show.
Is the Gun in Question.
The same gun that was involved in the other accidental discharge ?!
And if not was that gun examined?
One of the ADs (in the cabin with Hannah) was a rifle, possibly the lever-action they’ve talked about. The other was Sarah Zachary, but I can’t remember which gun it was.
Love your videos! I’m in Nashville TN, in Inglewood. Thanks for all you do!!
I wish i was not so far behind the live trial but getting there defiantly seems to have an almost pesdup like baldwin trail to this...hopefully not too much more around this asepct of things because i feel they have sufficnetly proven via experts gun does not go boom apart from in 2 sistuations.
1 - trigger pull
2 - known defect that with the right knock in resting posistion a full 6 rounds might cause a chamber to go off...this being a known defect of the model.
This is also somethign that is wierd to me if it has this known issue why would they keep loading with six why not only every load 5 at most...i am not sure the prosecution has picked up on this and yet it is more evidence of recklessness
She explains exactly why she listed accidental death Huge plus for the defense
I can’t believe I am caught up on all your lives!! And now EDB in real time! Love your work.
Broken ribs are also likely CPR related.
Yep. I was shown how to do CPR on a medical dummy once, and the energy required for me to get relatively close to accurate (I think I was 70-75% effective) was insane. I cannot imagine trying to do CPR on someone without breaking ribs 😮.
One thing I like about these trials is I get to see experts in fields I didn't even know existed. Especially female experts! It's exciting to see other women in male dominated fields.
46:30 @edb new intro, I’m Emily, I interrupt. Also fellow adhd-er and my report cards from school say the same, I’m Nicole, I interrupt
1:05:10 EBD that’s why we love watching your court feeds: you call it as you see it and use the cursy words. You may feel it would make you a” terrible judge“ (not sure I totally agree with your assessment) but you’re an awesome law nerd UA-camr! ❤
If you watched The Staircase about the guy connected with two deaths by staircase, you saw the defense attorney flip out when the coroner determined the death was a "homicide" and the judge overruled his objection. He understood that it was the jury's job to determine whether the manner of death was homicide. In the documentary, he said he was quitting his practice as a result.
Watching her interviews, she impresses as a "teenager" playing armorer instead of taking her job seriously. She had no training but her father who missed the priority for his job in training her, RESPONSIBILITY. She wasn't even in the union, nothing. Her lazy and unprofessional,attitude and blowing everything off was incredible with a woman dead. It's as bad as Baldwin's sociopathic lies and disregard for the woman he killed, not even mentioning her name in the 20-20 interview. What a crew. That's Hollywood?
Even if there are no convictions, these prosecutions needed to be brought.
Definitely.
What if it wasnt an accident? What if someone planted it?
Or someone got to the M.E.
What if? It’s not like they have any proof of that. More likely Hannah was more focused on being the cool kid and doing lines of coke while taking selfies with guns… than being a responsible armorer. After all, she was supposed to shake each bullet before loading them and instead she shook the entire box 🤦🏻♀️, so one real bullet that doesn’t make noise in a sea of BB’s isn’t exactly gunna be noticed. I mean, she stored loose bullets in a f’n Fanny pack!! Of course they got mixed up! How real rounds got on set is that she accidentally brought them and none of her half-as’d safety checks caught her mistake. Can we stop with the conspiracy theories now?
Damn it Emily time zones are beginning to peeve me! I have to watch these the following day. One day...............
What old "on set accident" is she referring to? The crow movie was not filmed in CA. Is she referring to Jon-erik?
Perhaps “on set accident“ meant the previous, There was a firearm discharge on the rush set prior to Alecs, part reason why the camera crew walked.
Oh right. I forgot about that. Thanks.
@@TeejayTheAussieno she said it happened in CA (California). She was referencing a different movie.
I wonder if they didn’t allow the reporters during the autopsy testimony and pictures so that wouldn’t have an issue!! Hahha you just said this as I was typing it
Not me realizing just now on replay the reason why Amy Van Dyken’s name was so familiar to me when I would see it in the live chats. 🤦🏻♀️🤦🏻♀️
Emily reacting to Luke Haag testimony is hilarious 😂
replay crew 💜💜💜 thanks EDB for hanging out!
I heard Alec Baldwin TV interview and it seemed off to me.
I agree….He’s kind of an off person.
From a scientific perspective, I would have thought that the ME would have based her decision for COD on the evidence/condition of the deceased and not on the situation leading up to the death. Seems to me like she let the situation dictate her findings rather than relying on hard evidence within her scope of duty.
Replay crew: I’m loving the M.E.’s necklace
Me too! I had to zoom in, looks like lapis lazuli.
or the necklace on Titanic
Could it be accidental because it is not "proven" that Baldwin pulled the trigger?? Cuzco isn't that what Baldwin is claiming?
Which is not fact. He said that to get out of being charged, and the ME is supposed to take his word as fact? The point is- when you are dealing with a firearm it’s never accidental. It’s either murder or it’s wreck less disregard for safety.
@kateashby3066 I Agree, there's something I do not like about that ME, I was just making a suggestion
My 'spidey sense' was tingling when the prosecutor showed those unredacted text message documents in court the other day. Something about the way that went down felt like she has a personal agenda when it comes to how video cameras in the courtroom impact her job and she did that to prove a point. I hope my instincts are off but something about it still isn't sitting right with me.
I understand what you are saying, but my mind wonders, under discovery, the defence also has copies of all evidence that will be presented. Both the defence and the prosecution are equally at fault that unredacted private information was released. The prosecution did present the evidence in court, but they are equally at fault for not ensuring private information was redacted.
@@supergran62 Right? Did nobody even watch any of Depp v Heard? That shit was redacted from the jump. This is amateur hour.
@supergran62 Is each team independently responsible for redacting documents they enter into evidence during trial? Do they share access to a singular source of documentation evidence or each have their own copies?
@@supergran62how ironic considering this case and how multiple ppl didn’t do their jobs properly either 😂
replay crew forever because 1.5 speed
I am with you!
I watch all youtube on 2x speed sometimes I wish you could speed it up more I can't cope with how slow alot of witnesses talk😅
Great presentation
Please dont ever stop inerrupting
EDB Thanks for membership😊😊
Emily, do you live in Franklin, TN? I live in Clarksville!
Doesn't hame much to do with Hannah?! This feels very much like a trial run for Baldwins case. Like prosecution is testing out how a jury reacts to all their arguments.
I thought over and over why didn’t the medics take her the hospital. They kept waiting to stabilize her. Why couldn’t they just take her to proper emergency room and get her the help she needed. And heating this testimony makes me think it even more.
This is what first responders do to give her a fighting chance. She would have needed to go to a specialist emergency trauma centre, not just a small hospital with limited resources.
It’s procedure, think of the chaos that would come with trying to move a patient that’s still bleeding heavily into a helicopter.
And if they get her in, imagine the chaos of trying to stabilize them in the tiny space of the helicopter.
They have to stabilize to ensure she gets to the hospital alive.
Replay crew ❤
I was confused why an ME would deal with intent?
Do, everything is gone over in detail for a case, so I don’t care about the ME classification. She doesn’t have the final say.
What is the blue lubricant?
And gravity is your friend....I love him.
Are you KIDDING ME?!?! My youngest is Lucien, spelled like him! Wasn’t aware there were any more!😂
gravity is NOT my friend and glad i dont have an uncle named Bob,,"Gravity is your friend and Bob's your uncle!!" blahahaha that cracked me up !!!
I do think Hannah was put in a difficult position but I think if she took her job seriously enough or fully appreciated it’s importance she wouldn’t have stayed with the production. Easier said than done, but I think she and others have to take responsibility for this tragedy.
Possible shaved trigger?????
❤❤❤
Replay crew 😊
Im behind but Im laughing my ass off at your comments with the gun.
❤💜Emily commentary
again, i mean yes, there never should have been a live round on set BUT even more doubt as to who caused the death is there - intubated wrong - over an hour before they got her to the hospital = severe blood loss... so many factors here - its difficult for me to hold only Hannah responsible - should she be punished probably but i dont feel to this extent. the defense is doing a great job at causing doubt.
What doubt? It's her responsibility no matter the circumstances.
@@garykidson4489all I'm saying is the defense has so far, in my opinion, done a good job to poke holes and make this not BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT for me.
i have reasonable doubt.
if i were on the jury there are too many other factors (including a friggin guy who plead who needed to take so much more responsibility than 6 months probation) where i could not feel comfortable holding only Hannah responsible.
Circumstances 100% matter... that's why sometimes they wont charge someone who caused a traffic accident if the circumstances were of such a nature that they couldn't hold the driver responsible.
if the circumstances on the set were so bad it creates doubt in my mind and therefor i would not be able to vote guilty.
each to his own tho.
Replay crew! I'm so glad I wasn't able to view live because I would've been 😂 too loud in my office!
Criminology degreed person here (not practicing as a criminologist currently, I’m a supervising stock broker. 😂)
Yeah, Hi! That’s definitely weird to me too, Emily. The teetering of discipline for “volitional act” seems to be a bit too much of her being an investigator. Pick a lane New Mexico MEs. Pick. A. Lane.
Deep replay crew here!! Hope to catch up over spring break lol
Hi Emily how is it determined if a case has a special prosecutor or not. Sorry if that is a dumb question.
I’m fairly certain it happens mostly in smaller jurisdictions where the city/town doesn’t have enough manpower to prosecute a large case. But it might happen in other circumstances? Santa Fe is def on the smaller side especially for THIS case.
@@kateashby3066 Thanks for clearing that up for me.