Halyna Hutchins Shot With Prop Gun - Alec Baldwin indicted & Hannah Gutierrez-Reed charged, 2021 #7

New Posts

Weki said:
Having a sentence reduced on appeal is extremely unlikely imo. Judges have a lot of discretion when it comes to sentencing. There is no "error" when it comes to sentencing unless the judge violates sentencing guidelines and here 18 months is the max and she gave her that. She will do 85% of the 18 months. Saying that you don't have to shake the dummies and being completely remoreless makes you a dangerous person - definitely qualifies as a 'serious violent offender.' She basically admitted in her jail calls that she didn't have to do her duty to ensure safety on set. That's an aggravating factor and the judge is allowed to consider that in the penalty phase. She didn't pull the trigger herself but she did everything to ensure the outcome. JMO
Click to expand...
I'm gonna disagree on part of that. Being negligent does not automatically make you violent. If a plane mechanic leaves a bolt missing, and the plane crashes, the crash might be violent but what the mechanic did was not.

She deserved 18 months for negligence. There was no violence in her lack of actions.
 
Slick762 said:
I'm gonna disagree on part of that. Being negligent does not automatically make you violent. If a plane mechanic leaves a bolt missing, and the plane crashes, the crash might be violent but what the mechanic did was not.

She deserved 18 months for negligence. There was no violence in her lack of actions.
Click to expand...
You missed my point. I didn't say being negligent makes you automatically violent. I was talking about the specific facts and circumstances of THIS case. I said that if you feel like you do not have to do your duty to ensure gun safety/save lives...that makes you a dangerous person. A dangerous person can definitely be a violent offender. The purpose of sentencing is not just punishment but to protect the public. The sentence the judge gave labels HGR a "serious violent offender" which prohibits her from owning guns. And that's the key part here. If she was allowed to own guns again with the feeling that she does not have to be safe and responsible, that's a danger to society. Violence has subtler shades. It doesn't only describe the most apparent.
 
Baldwin. Being "Fired" from Another Job. Lost Five Jobs?
Cool Cats said:
....
This whole thing doesn't bode well for Baldwin.... 2 Cents ....
*Warning* Get out your hankies.....
In an interview with CNN Baldwin said since the incident he has lost five jobs.
"I got fired from another job yesterday," Baldwin told CNN. "There I was all set to go to a movie, jump on a plane ... I've been talking with these guys for months and they told me yesterday we don't want to do the film with you because of this."
Click to expand...

snipped for focus @Cool Cats Thx for your post w links.

FIrst I'd be curious to hear from "these guys" on the other end of this AB-reported convo.
What were their names? Project/movie/series names?
Had there been serious discussions w him?
Going on "for months?"
Had AB & "these guys" executed a CONTRACT for his services as actor/producer/whatever?
If not, then imo raises question re his "being fired."

No other possible REASON for "being fired" from job?
Maybe BEFORE final casting or executing contract, decision maker(s) selected someone else? Someone younger, older, taller, shorter, thinner, heftier, lower priced, better looking, of another ethnicity or race. Or perhaps axed the role altogether. What-ev.

^ "Five jobs" "lost" or "fired from" since HH's death?
Because of ^ "this"^ ?
Did he file any breach of contract lawsuits?

The cnn link dated Aug 20, 2022 several months after death also said, "... he says “has taken years off” his life and has cost him professionally.""

IDK, could be, but no tears; my hanky remains folded and dry.
 
Lets also remember Rust was produced by Alec Baldwin. He bought the rights to the book (I believe) and hired Souza to write the screenplay and gave himself the lead. Nothing is stopping him from doing that again. If people do not want to work with him again because he's reckless and responsible for the death of a beloved crew member....well....they are well within their rights. Imagine what the insurance premium would be for him to work on a set involving guns ever again? And even if there are no guns involved, imagine the publicity nightmare of having AB on your movie and then him going around doing a press tour with this whole nightmare in the backdrop. Imagine how other actors/crew members would feel having this guy on a movie set given what transpired on Rust. The average person is told a million times not to "burn bridges" on a job so you can get a good reference for your next job but that doesn't apply to AB?? Same principle appplis. If he had respected the profession, the cast, the crew....he wouldn't be in this position. JMO
 
Slick762 said:
That's just my opinion. It's not as if the state didn't have a strong case for a max sentence. Using videos with music to elicit an emotional response is just unprofessional for a prosecutor, IMO.
Click to expand...
HGR had been convicted already so there was nobody to sway with the video. The judge considered HGR's conduct after her trial, i.e. the jail phone calls and her inability to show remorse along with the seriousness of the offence that resulted in a death.
 
Weki said:
You missed my point. I didn't say being negligent makes you automatically violent. I was talking about the specific facts and circumstances of THIS case. I said that if you feel like you do not have to do your duty to ensure gun safety/save lives...that makes you a dangerous person. A dangerous person can definitely be a violent offender. The purpose of sentencing is not just punishment but to protect the public. The sentence the judge gave labels HGR a "serious violent offender" which prohibits her from owning guns. And that's the key part here. If she was allowed to own guns again with the feeling that she does not have to be safe and responsible, that's a danger to society. Violence has subtler shades. It doesn't only describe the most apparent.
Click to expand...
The felony conviction is what prohibits her from possessing firearms from now on.
 
At long last!!!
Thank you Judge.

"Rust armorer Hannah Gutierrez-Reed ​

sobs as she is sentenced to 18 months in prison ​

for involuntary manslaughter of cinematographer ​

Halyna Hutchins."​


1713217830941.png


www-dailymail-co-uk.cdn.ampproject.org

Rust Armorer Hannah Gutierrez-Reed sentenced to 18 months in prison

Hannah Guttierez-Reed was sentenced Monday to 18 months in prison for the fatal, on-set shooting of cinematographer Halyna Hutchins.
www-dailymail-co-uk.cdn.ampproject.org www-dailymail-co-uk.cdn.ampproject.org
 
Weki said:
You missed my point. I didn't say being negligent makes you automatically violent. I was talking about the specific facts and circumstances of THIS case. I said that if you feel like you do not have to do your duty to ensure gun safety/save lives...that makes you a dangerous person. A dangerous person can definitely be a violent offender. The purpose of sentencing is not just punishment but to protect the public. The sentence the judge gave labels HGR a "serious violent offender" which prohibits her from owning guns. And that's the key part here. If she was allowed to own guns again with the feeling that she does not have to be safe and responsible, that's a danger to society. Violence has subtler shades. It doesn't only describe the most apparent.
Click to expand...
Same goes with her hiding a gun on her person to get into that bar ... a true danger to society!!!
 
PrairieWind said:
The felony conviction is what prohibits her from possessing firearms from now on.
Click to expand...

Sneaking in guns via "butt cheeks" indeed. In a way, I feel sorry for her, she just wasn't ready for this job, not mature enough. She obviously didn't take it seriously, and as a result, she didn't get any respect for her position in regards to safety by Halls or Baldwin. So, they ignored safety protocol.

Felony. Well, hopefully her job at "Mattress Warehouse" will be available for her. Sad about her father having cancer.

18 months isn't that long, and really, it will be 85% of that. I don't really think that she will ever get to a point where she acknowledges her culpability.
 
mickey2942 said:
Sneaking in guns via "butt cheeks" indeed. In a way, I feel sorry for her, she just wasn't ready for this job, not mature enough. She obviously didn't take it seriously, and as a result, she didn't get any respect for her position in regards to safety by Halls or Baldwin. So, they ignored safety protocol.

Felony. Well, hopefully her job at "Mattress Warehouse" will be available for her. Sad about her father having cancer.

18 months isn't that long, and really, it will be 85% of that. I don't really think that she will ever get to a point where she acknowledges her culpability.
Click to expand...

She was not ready for this job, I
agree. I’m not sure though if she was just immature about guns. She strikes me as an aloof rebel and that is what makes her dangerous. I’m glad the judge recognized that she is a threat to the public.

Considering how she acted during the trial signifies that her everyday unseen actions have the potential to be more reckless. 18 months is nothing compared to other sentences that fit the same narrative.

It would be nice if she took responsibility for her actions and learned from it. Unfortunately I think she feels resentful.

Weki said:
You missed my point. I didn't say being negligent makes you automatically violent. I was talking about the specific facts and circumstances of THIS case. I said that if you feel like you do not have to do your duty to ensure gun safety/save lives...that makes you a dangerous person. A dangerous person can definitely be a violent offender. The purpose of sentencing is not just punishment but to protect the public. The sentence the judge gave labels HGR a "serious violent offender" which prohibits her from owning guns. And that's the key part here. If she was allowed to own guns again with the feeling that she does not have to be safe and responsible, that's a danger to society. Violence has subtler shades. It doesn't only describe the most apparent.
Click to expand...
 
Luna20 said:
She was not ready for this job, I
agree. I’m not sure though if she was just immature about guns. She strikes me as an aloof rebel and that is what makes her dangerous. I’m glad the judge recognized that she is a threat to the public.

Considering how she acted during the trial signifies that her everyday unseen actions have the potential to be more reckless. 18 months is nothing compared to other sentences that fit the same narrative.

It would be nice if she took responsibility for her actions and learned from it. Unfortunately I think she feels resentful.
Click to expand...
So agree on all points.

Given her maturity level and what appears to be entitlement and lack of self awareness, I agree with the Judge that HG is a threat to the public.

I hope she spends some time thinking in prison and puts her resentfulness in the rear view mirror.

MOO
 
I thought Joel Souza statement was profound. About all the milestones and moments in Halya’s son’s life are forever changed. Joel’s too. Can you imagine the depth of what he has gone through? He was pierced by the same bullet that killed HH.

HRG’s mugshot…I still don’t see any empathy/remorse. Only attitude. JMO
 
Last edited:
Luna20 said:
She was not ready for this job, I
agree. I’m not sure though if she was just immature about guns. She strikes me as an aloof rebel and that is what makes her dangerous. I’m glad the judge recognized that she is a threat to the public.

Considering how she acted during the trial signifies that her everyday unseen actions have the potential to be more reckless. 18 months is nothing compared to other sentences that fit the same narrative.

It would be nice if she took responsibility for her actions and learned from it. Unfortunately I think she feels resentful.
Click to expand...
Even if this woman is prohibited from owning and operating guns when she gets out, I’m certain she will not adhere to it, based on her attitude and actions so far. It seems to be a huge part of her identity as a human being, like a child dragging along their trusted security blanket wherever they may go. MOO
 
stripehaven2 said:
I’m not exactly Baldwin’s biggest fan but I’m still confused about his culpability. Shouldn’t he have been able to trust that the armorer had done her job correctly? Or is the issue that he was ultimately responsible for the actions of the crew and therefore bears responsibility?
Click to expand...
It's not about the fact that he was a producer, to my mind. It's about the fact that he was using a firearm which ended up killing someone and seriously injuring another.

If you are using a firearm it is up to YOU to check it and satisfy yourself that what you are doing is safe. Actors should not operate under a different safety standard and duty of care than every other firearm user in the world.

The principle is simple - firearms can kill people. If you aren't prepared to carry that burden and take the consequences when something goes wrong then don't use firearms.
 
Weki said:
If she was allowed to own guns again with the feeling that she does not have to be safe and responsible, that's a danger to society. Violence has subtler shades. It doesn't only describe the most apparent.
Click to expand...
Will she be banned for life from using/possessing firearms or for a set amount of years?

The way it works here is that if you are sentenced to a term of between three months and three years you are prohibited from using or handling firearms or ammunition for five years from your date of release and if you get sentenced to more than three years it's a lifetime ban. That's for any offence, not just ones involving violence or injury.
 
Last edited:
Marantz4250b said:
Will she be banned for life from using/possessing firearms or for a set amount of years?

The way it works here is that if you are sentenced to a term of between three months and three years you are prohibited from using or handling firearms or ammunition for five years from your date of release and if you get sentenced to more than three years it's a lifetime ban. That's for any offence, not just ones involving violence or injury.
Click to expand...
Under federal law, she is prohibited from possessing a firearm because she is a felon. So as long as that felony remains on her record she is a prohibited person. She could later petition to reduce that felony but that is extremely unlikely to be granted and even if it is, the BATFE still may consider her prohibited.
 
The lack of caring and her attitude (OMG those jail calls) she will absolutely do what she wishes when she gets out.
i didn't see the sobbing. We know now where she gets her entitlement from. Parents still defend her.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 260 more.
Total: 3,791 (members: 261, guests: 3,530)

Online statistics

Members online
261
Guests online
3,530
Total visitors
3,791
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
592,668
Messages
17,972,838
Members
228,855
Latest member
Shaunie
Back
Top