Alec Baldwin's defense team says even if he pulled the trigger on 'Rust' set, 'that doesn't make him guilty'

Alec Baldwin's defense team said that even if he did pull the trigger on the set of "Rust," he wouldn't be guilty of homicide.

Baldwin's team has been adamant throughout court proceedings he did not pull the trigger when the gun went off, killing cinematographer Halyna Hutchins on the set of the Western movie.

However, the 66-year-old's defense attorney Alex Spiro said in his opening statement for Baldwin's manslaughter trial that Baldwin may be wrong and may have pulled the trigger. This was the first time that the team alluded to this as a possibility, reports show. Spiro also argued though that this fact would still not make Baldwin criminally negligent.

"On a movie set, you're allowed to pull the trigger," Spiro said, per Variety. "Even if he intentionally pulled the trigger ... that doesn't make him guilty of homicide."

Baldwin himself has previously denied ever pulling the trigger, claiming instead that the gun malfunctioned.

'If he did, of course, that would only make his statement incorrect.'

As Blaze News reported, the FBI claimed it was not possible for the gun to fire without the trigger pull, but the agency was blamed by Baldwin's defense for breaking the gun during its testing. An FBI examiner hit the gun with a mallet to see if it would accidentally fire from the force and broke three components of the gun.

Lucien Haag, a firearms expert who examined the Colt .45 used by Baldwin, testified that the gun was indeed working properly before the FBI analyzed it. Haag also testified that the live rounds used on the set of "Rust" were "hand loaded," meaning they were made by an individual rather than a manufacturer.

The latter was integral in the trial of Hannah Gutierrez-Reed, the film's armorer. She was convicted of involuntary manslaughter but acquitted of a lesser charge of tampering with evidence. She was sentenced to 18 months in prison.

David Halls, the first assistant director on "Rust," pled no contest to negligent use of a deadly weapon and has been sentenced to probation.

The prosecution reportedly intends to attempt to prove Baldwin did pull the trigger, stating that numerous firearm experts will testify that the gun was working properly when Baldwin allegedly fired it.

Baldwin's defense argued, however, that the owner's manual of that particular model of gun — Colt .45 pistol — states that the gun can go off if the hammer is dropped on a live primer.

At the same time, attorney Spiro also reportedly urged jurors to acquit Baldwin even if it is found that he did pull the trigger.

"If he did, of course, that would only make his statement incorrect," the lawyer said. "That would mean he would have misspoke."

Even if he did misspeak, Spiro continued, it still wasn't Baldwin's fault that a real bullet was loaded into the gun.

"When this issue [is] discussed, it's easy to sort of pull yourself into courtroom-land and away from a movie set," the attorney theorized. "[Baldwin] did not know, or have any reason to know, that the gun was loaded with a live bullet. That's the key. That live bullet is the key. That is the lethal element."

The prosecution is bringing in gun manufacturer Alessandro Pietta from Italy to inform jurors about quality-control measures. Pietta's company made the gun in question, according to the Sante Fe New Mexican.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!