Alec Baldwin fired prop gun, killing 1 on movie set, Oct 2021 #2

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Status
Not open for further replies.
Well, armorer also claimed there were no live ammunition on the set. Yet police believe they recovered live ammunition (they have to be checked by forensics first to be officially declared live ammunition, but I am sure police know one when they see it). So either she was unware of the presence of live bullets or she wasn't telling the truth about live bullets being on the set when police asked her.
Yes, and I'm sure police know the difference between what a witness believes to be true, and what is a deliberate lie, and how to detect which is the case, for everyone they interview.
 
So, I'm not sure I have this straight. Reed checked the gun, then Halls looked (but not well, only saw three dummy rounds) then the gun went into a safe? After lunch the guns were taken out of the safe and????? What happened next? And why did he call it a cold gun if he saw three dummy rounds? I read that a gun is called live when it has blanks because the blanks can be dangerous too? Can someone clarify for me?
 
In the search warrant, it is stated that Hannah told the investigator that, after lunch, the gun was taken out of the prop truck by another person, Sarah Zachary, and handed to Hannah.

Hannah had checked the "dummies" that day, presumably before lunch, and the guns were put back into the safe on the prop truck.
Ammo was left unsecured on the cart, and ammo was also in the prop truck.

So, am I understanding that all the firearms in the prop truck were "cold" and that the ammo was inserted from the cart, or someone inserted the ammo in the gun which Zachary handed to Hannah? Or was there a hot gun in the safe (from target practice maybe) that was never emptied?

Read the search warrant: New details revealed in ‘Rust’ shooting investigation
 
When I read that the gun was fired at close proximity to Halyna, I felt chills.
It must have looked like an execution :(

And now we hear that producers are bankrupt!
Is it a joke?
 
Last edited:
So, I'm not sure I have this straight. Reed checked the gun, then Halls looked (but not well, only saw three dummy rounds) then the gun went into a safe? After lunch the guns were taken out of the safe and????? What happened next? And why did he call it a cold gun if he saw three dummy rounds? I read that a gun is called live when it has blanks because the blanks can be dangerous too? Can someone clarify for me?
Halls says he looked at the gun before giving it to Baldwin. But he only saw 3 dummy rounds, and didn't check the rest. Gun with dummy rounds is a cold gun, because dummy rounds can't fire bullets and don't make noise. Blanks are different from dummy rounds. Blanks will make noise when fired and could be dangerous in close distance.
 
Industry standards often determine whether someone is negligent. They’re rigorously set up for a reason.

Baldwin is simply not culpable here. He is not the safety expert. It may seem like common sense to gun owners. But again, prop guns aren’t treated the same as guns in the real world.

It was not supposed to be loaded with live rounds. Live rounds weren’t supposed to be on set. It wasn’t even supposed to be loaded with blanks. The weapons master and prop master were responsible for ensuring that that was the case and Baldwin had every reason to be able to rely on their expertise before handling the prop, without checking it himself. Because he was not the expert in gun safety.

Not everyone even knows how to check the chamber. Or to tell the difference between a live round or a blank, which was not the issue here, but it proves the point.

Baldwin would be culpable when it comes to negligence if he grossly deviated from what he was supposed to do. Like I mentioned before, doing something like making his own decision to load the gun himself, for example.

Or, if he played a role in the hiring of the unprofessional prop and weapons masters.

I expect he will be named in any lawsuit. But as producer. But if he is named as negligent for his handling of the gun, he will not be found liable, ultimately. Because legally, he’s not liable.
But, it was a single action gun. He had to *advertiser censored* it to make it fire. And, despite industry standards, he did not verify himself that it was empty. And furthermore, despite industry standards, he pointed it at someone, without a plexiglass shield in place, and pulled the trigger.

I respectfully disagree. Industry standards were not followed by others, but especially Alec Baldwin. IMO he needs to be charged with a crime.
 
But, it was a single action gun. He had to *advertiser censored* it to make it fire. And, despite industry standards, he did not verify himself that it was empty. And furthermore, despite industry standards, he pointed it at someone, without a plexiglass shield in place, and pulled the trigger.

I respectfully disagree. Industry standards were not followed by others, but especially Alec Baldwin. IMO he needs to be charged with a crime.
There are no industry standards such as you claim.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
143
Guests online
2,429
Total visitors
2,572

Forum statistics

Threads
602,218
Messages
18,137,038
Members
231,274
Latest member
Venusflytrap100
Back
Top