Alec Baldwin charged with involuntary manslaughter in fatal 'Rust' shooting: district attorney

[radiochaser]

On 1/21/2023 at 12:50 AM, Bkk Brian said:

"Many news reports about the case have mentioned the 1993 death of Brandon Lee, who was shot by a fellow actor holding a prop gun during the filming of The Crow in North Carolina in 1993, the shooting, which occurred during the character’s death scene, was ruled accidental."

 

Alec Baldwin Manslaughter Charge Is a Stretch

I have no particular reason to defend Alec Baldwin, but there’s something unsettling about the manslaughter charges announced this week in the wake of last year’s tragic shooting on the set of the movie Rust. The controversial actor was holding a prop gun that he thought was filled with blanks; a live round fired and killed a cinematographer. A horrific accident, yes. But a crime? Here, matters are murkier.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/alec-baldwin-manslaughter-charge-is-a-stretch/2023/01/20/983f0a22-98e2-11ed-a173-61e055ec24ef_story.html

 

https://archive.ph/BwYgg (no paywall)

Wasn't he charged with "unintentional manslaughter"?   That is like driving drunk with passengers in your vehicle, crashing, and one or more of your passengers dies.   You can be charged with unintentional manslaughter!  

[ozimoron]

1 minute ago, radiochaser said:

The person most responsible for firearm safety, is the person that has it in his (or her) hand!  As I understand it, baldwin was the movie or show producer and if I understand that role, then he has ultimate responsibility for what happens on the set. 

baldwin may have the right to expect that the firearm was not loaded, but he had the ultimate responsibility, as the person who was operating the firearm, to make sure that it was not loaded with live rounds.   Easy to do, open the cylinder and look! 

As I have written before, the most common words out of a person's mouth, after a negligent discharge is, I didn't know it was loaded! What do you think that baldwin is claiming now about the firearm being loaded with a live round.   

Besides, he pointed it at a person, which is not done when filming, it just looks like the actors do that, then cocked the hammer on the revolver, then pulled the trigger.  That, is what the FBI investigation has determined.   The revolver did not just go off by itself, he pulled the trigger!  So baldwin has the ultimate responsibility for wounding one person and killing another!

To be fair to Baldwin, he likely doesn't have a gun licence nor has he had gun training. That's why they employed an amourer on the set.

[radiochaser]

On 1/20/2023 at 12:38 AM, Hummin said:

Obviously you and me are trained handled weapons, but if I was on a movie set given ha movie prop, Im sure I would have for one second believed it was loaded! 

Unfortunately it was a real revolver, not a prop!

[Bkk Brian]

5 minutes ago, radiochaser said:

Wasn't he charged with "unintentional manslaughter"?   That is like driving drunk with passengers in your vehicle, crashing, and one or more of your passengers dies.   You can be charged with unintentional manslaughter!  

If you read the full article its just an opinion piece however he does list a few examples where the situations were similar and no charges were laid such as this one but there are more. I'm not saying he was right or wrong by the way just giving some other viewpoints that were published.

 

During a 2015 re-enactment of a shootout in Tombstone, Arizona, one participant shot and seriously injured another. The shooter was using his own revolver — a real one — and, running late for the show, had forgotten that the gun was loaded with live rounds. A subsequent investigation found that five of the live rounds were fired. Nevertheless, the shooting was ruled accidental and no charges were filed.

[Hummin]

1 minute ago, radiochaser said:

Unfortunately it was a real revolver, not a prop!

Where I come from, somebody else would had been on trail, not Baldwin.

 

And the charges would have been reckless act with death as result. The correct term might be Involuntary Manslaughter and Reckless Homicide.

[JonnyF]

On 1/20/2023 at 1:51 PM, placeholder said:

He could plead that he thought it wasn't a real gun. Just a prop.

He could plead that.

 

Unfortunately, he did not "KNOW" that it was just a prop. If he KNEW, an innocent woman would not have died from a gunshot wound that day. Therefore, to point the gun at someone and pull the trigger is incredibly reckless. Which fits the defintion of involuntary manslaughter pretty much perfectly.

 

https://www.justia.com/criminal/offenses/homicide/involuntary-manslaughter/

 

[placeholder]

4 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

He could plead that.

 

Unfortunately, he did not "KNOW" that it was just a prop. If he KNEW, an innocent woman would not have died from a gunshot wound that day. Therefore, to point the gun at someone and pull the trigger is incredibly reckless. Which fits the defintion of involuntary manslaughter pretty much perfectly.

 

https://www.justia.com/criminal/offenses/homicide/involuntary-manslaughter/

 

Dubious

First of all, it’s not his responsibility as an actor to ensure prop safety.  Actors, they’re not even allowed to do that. What people don’t understand is, the Screen Actors Guild, the union, does not allow any producer, anybody, to use an actor for anything on set other than acting.

https://slate.com/culture/2023/01/alec-baldwin-manslaughter-rust-halyna-hutchins.html

[mikeymike100]

On 1/21/2023 at 12:00 AM, jimn said:

So why bother with having a safety expert on set when filming. As an actor you are entitled to assume these things have been checked. Maybe its because I am a Brit where the US gun culture is not part of my daily life. I would hate to live in fear in the US where guns are an everyday concern. We have many issues but guns 100% not, in fact I have never seen a live gun and I do not know anyone who owns one, thank goodness.

As an actor/actress using a gun, you would be briefed on basic safety procedure by the armorer. The person using a weapon is ultimately responsible to make sure its checked.

[radiochaser]

7 hours ago, ozimoron said:

To be fair to Baldwin, he likely doesn't have a gun licence nor has he had gun training. That's why they employed an amourer on the set.

Do a search on baldwin and gun safety training.   

There was and is no gun license requirement. 

[ozimoron]

7 minutes ago, radiochaser said:

Do a search on baldwin and gun safety training.   

There was and is no gun license requirement. 

I didn't suggest that he did have either a license or training or that there was a requirement. I said that he likely didn't since he was a movie actor and only required to use the gun in the making of the movie. Ensuring that the gun was not loaded with  live bullets and that it was used safely was the armourer's job. That's why they had one. I did say earlier in this thread that he was negligent in that he pointed the gun at the victim which was not part of making the movie. I suspect that there will be a plea deal  with some limited jail time. There has to be some consequences for wrongful death.

[JonnyF]

15 hours ago, placeholder said:

Dubious

First of all, it’s not his responsibility as an actor to ensure prop safety.  Actors, they’re not even allowed to do that. What people don’t understand is, the Screen Actors Guild, the union, does not allow any producer, anybody, to use an actor for anything on set other than acting.

https://slate.com/culture/2023/01/alec-baldwin-manslaughter-rust-halyna-hutchins.html

It's his responsibility as a citizen not to point a gun at someone and pull the trigger unless he KNOWS it is not loaded. Not thinks, suspects, assumes. KNOWS. To do otherwise is reckless. Now, read that definition again.

 

 

Now I know he's a good dedicated Democrat and all that, but somehow I doubt the Screen Actors Unions rules will supersede those of the American justice system. He has blood on his hands and he should take his punishment like a man instead of trying to weasle out of it by blaming all those around him.

[placeholder]

Just now, JonnyF said:

It's his responsibility as a citizen not to point a gun at someone and pull the trigger unless he KNOWS it is not loaded. Not thinks, suspects, assumes. KNOWS. To do otherwise is reckless. Now, read that definition again.

 

 

Now I know he's a good dedicated Democrat and all that, but somehow I doubt the Screen Actors Unions rules will supersede those of the American justice system. He has blood on his hands and he should take his punishment like a man instead of trying to weasle out of it by blaming all those around him.

He should take his punshment? You mean he's already been convicted?

[Bkk Brian]

2 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

It's his responsibility as a citizen not to point a gun at someone and pull the trigger unless he KNOWS it is not loaded. Not thinks, suspects, assumes. KNOWS. To do otherwise is reckless. Now, read that definition again.

 

 

Now I know he's a good dedicated Democrat and all that, but somehow I doubt the Screen Actors Unions rules will supersede those of the American justice system. He has blood on his hands and he should take his punishment like a man instead of trying to weasle out of it by blaming all those around him.

Now I know he's a good dedicated Democrat and all that, but somehow I doubt the Screen Actors Unions rules will supersede those of the American justice system. He has blood on his hands and he should take his punishment like a man instead of trying to weasle out of it by blaming all those around him.

 

I for one didn't even know he was a dem. I didn't think this had anything to do with it does it?

[JonnyF]

1 minute ago, placeholder said:

He should take his punshment? You mean he's already been convicted?

He's only just been charged, how could he be convicted? Read the OP for goodness sake and stop asking inane questions.????

[JonnyF]

1 minute ago, Bkk Brian said:

Now I know he's a good dedicated Democrat and all that, but somehow I doubt the Screen Actors Unions rules will supersede those of the American justice system. He has blood on his hands and he should take his punishment like a man instead of trying to weasle out of it by blaming all those around him.

 

I for one didn't even know he was a dem. I didn't think this had anything to do with it does it?

Well it goes some way towards explaining his actions since he killed the woman.

[placeholder]

5 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

He's only just been charged, how could he be convicted? Read the OP for goodness sake and stop asking inane questions.????

What don't you understand about the fact that a person has to be convicted before they face punishment?

[Bkk Brian]

4 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

Well it goes some way towards explaining his actions since he killed the woman.

I still don't understand, whats this got to do with politics? Why are you try to bring this into this tragic accident or whatever the verdict may be?

[JonnyF]

Just now, placeholder said:

What don't you understand about the fact that a person has to be convicted before they face punishment?

Strawman.

 

I said he should take his punishment. I did not say said punishment had been agreed upon yet. Maybe he will be found guilty and his punishment will be jail time. Maybe he will be found not guilty and his punishment will only be loss of reputation, months in court and the guilt of killing an innocent woman hanging over him for the rest of his life. 

 

Either way, he should take it like a man. Somehow, given his post-killing weasel like interviews, I doubt he will.

[Social Media]

Off topic post and subsequent exchanges removed.

[Rimmer]

More off topic nonesense from the same suspect has been removed, you need to stop this now!

[placeholder]

2 hours ago, JonnyF said:

Strawman.

 

I said he should take his punishment. I did not say said punishment had been agreed upon yet. Maybe he will be found guilty and his punishment will be jail time. Maybe he will be found not guilty and his punishment will only be loss of reputation, months in court and the guilt of killing an innocent woman hanging over him for the rest of his life. 

 

Either way, he should take it like a man. Somehow, given his post-killing weasel like interviews, I doubt he will.

 

2 hours ago, JonnyF said:

Strawman.

 

I said he should take his punishment. I did not say said punishment had been agreed upon yet. Maybe he will be found guilty and his punishment will be jail time. Maybe he will be found not guilty and his punishment will only be loss of reputation, months in court and the guilt of killing an innocent woman hanging over him for the rest of his life. 

 

Either way, he should take it like a man. Somehow, given his post-killing weasel like interviews, I doubt he will.

You should be writing scripts for B movies. No, make that D movies.

[JonnyF]

1 hour ago, placeholder said:

 

You should be writing scripts for B movies. No, make that D movies.

So good in fact, you had to quote me twice ????

[placeholder]

4 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

So good in fact, you had to quote me twice ????

I have very poor taste in films.

[Bkk Brian]

This appears to be a separate case that implicates Baldwin. Its being brought by the armorer for ‘Rust’ against the company that supplied the ammunition used on the set. It alleges that the company mixed live ammunition with dummy rounds that Gutierrez-Reed needed for loading Baldwin’s gun.

 

Alec Baldwin ignored gun training request before fatal shooting, still hasn’t turned over phone

While the lawsuit doesn’t name Baldwin as a defendant, it paints a picture of lax adherence to gun safety protocols on the set. Gutierrez-Reed also appeared to cast some blame on Baldwin for failing to attend a “cross draw training” session and for how he handled the weapon, Insider reported. The lawsuit said Gutierrez-Reed asked Baldwin to schedule the training on Oct. 15, less than a week before the Oct. 21 fatal shooting, but she never heard back from him.

https://www.mercurynews.com/2022/01/13/alec-baldwin-ignored-gun-training-request-before-fatal-shooting-still-hasnt-turned-over-phone/

[ozimoron]

20 minutes ago, Bkk Brian said:

This appears to be a separate case that implicates Baldwin. Its being brought by the armorer for ‘Rust’ against the company that supplied the ammunition used on the set. It alleges that the company mixed live ammunition with dummy rounds that Gutierrez-Reed needed for loading Baldwin’s gun.

 

Alec Baldwin ignored gun training request before fatal shooting, still hasn’t turned over phone

While the lawsuit doesn’t name Baldwin as a defendant, it paints a picture of lax adherence to gun safety protocols on the set. Gutierrez-Reed also appeared to cast some blame on Baldwin for failing to attend a “cross draw training” session and for how he handled the weapon, Insider reported. The lawsuit said Gutierrez-Reed asked Baldwin to schedule the training on Oct. 15, less than a week before the Oct. 21 fatal shooting, but she never heard back from him.

https://www.mercurynews.com/2022/01/13/alec-baldwin-ignored-gun-training-request-before-fatal-shooting-still-hasnt-turned-over-phone/

He's toast.

[JonnyF]

It seems there had been many issues re. guns on the set prior to Baldwin pointing the gun and pulling the trigger, killing his colleague.

 

https://www.latimes.com/entertainment-arts/business/story/2021-10-22/alec-baldwin-rust-camera-crew-walked-off-set

 

 

Given that Baldwin was not only the star of the movie whose body double shot the live rounds, but also one of the movie's producers he would surely have known about this incident, which makes him firing the gun at a colleague without checking not long after, even more reckless. 

[pedro01]

One thing against Alec here is his initial claims that the gun went off in his hand. That he didn't pull the trigger.  If it turns out he did (and experts seem to indicate the gun couldn't just go off without a trigger pull) pull the trigger and it's provable, then that lie won't help him.

 

As for whether he should be punished or not. I'm on the fence but I don't think it would harm to go up before a jury and hammer it all out.