Alec Baldwin fired prop gun, killing 1 on movie set, Oct 2021 #4

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
10ofRods said:
And that's exactly what crew members were tweeting on the day it happened. It will be very interesting to see what happens next. Script supervisor would be the expert on what's in the script. Also, this would protect the director from being included in any charges, as he did not direct AB to do what he did, nor did the script he wrote call for that.

There are reasons why scripts are written the way they are these, with attention to gun safety built into most of them.

Even a blank could have hurt someone at the distance he fired.
Click to expand...
Regarding the bolded, I disagree. Unless it's within a foot or two a blank will not hurt someone.

Start at 7:00
 
steeltowngirl said:
Isn’t Mitchell the one that was swearing about the AD during the 911 call?

Edit - here is the 911 call and no one is blaming the AD. But I swear I read something like that?
Click to expand...

A 'Rust' script supervisor said in a 911 call that the assistant director was 'supposed to check the guns'

Alec Baldwin shooting: Frantic 911 caller blames assistant director as shocking details emerge.

In the audio, Mitchell can be heard blaming the film's assistant director.

"This AD that yelled at me at lunch asking about revisions, this *advertiser censored*," Mitchell says, appearing to be in conversation with someone who was not on the call. "Did you see him come up to my desk and yell at me?"
"He's supposed to check the guns. He's responsible for what happened."

The frantic caller then goes into an explicit rant blaming the assistant director.

"I was sitting, we were rehearsing, and it went off," Mitchell told the operator. "And I ran out."
 
Last edited:
More at the link
‘Rust’ Script Supervisor Sues Alec Baldwin, Producers Over Shooting – The Hollywood Reporter

“It was discussed that there would be [three] tight camera shots when filming resumed [after a lunch break],” states her complaint. “One camera shot would be focused on DEFENDANT BALDWIN’s eyes, one would be focused on a bloodstain on DEFENDANT BALDWIN’s shoulder, and the third would focus on DEFENDANT BALDWIN’s torso as he reached his hand down to the holster and removed the gun. There was nothing in the script about the gun being discharged by DEFENDANT BALDWIN or by any other person.”

The complaint adds that, against basic safety protocols, at no time was she advised that a gun would be discharged, that there was limited plexiglass in the church setting and that crewmembers weren’t told to look on monitors outside of the church so as not to be in close proximity to the action.

“Prior to, and at the time of DEFENDANT BALDWIN’s discharge of the loaded gun, no rehearsal was called and the crew had not commenced filming,” states the complaint.
 
steeltowngirl said:
What is the basis of her claim? Is she saying future earnings from the movie being shut down?
“Mitchell is suing for an unspecified amount for loss of future earnings, special and general damages, attorney fees and punitive damages.”
Click to expand...
The article I read was pretty vague. I'd like to go find the actual complaint filed. She can probably make a case for emotional distress, but I really question what damages she will be able to prove. She could certainly prove lost income if she was paid hourly depending on what her contract says.
 
10ofRods said:
I suspect they don't want to file charges in waves. They want to file them all at the same time. And it looks to me like HGR is going to face some criminal charges of some kind, perhaps they're still determining which ones. But, they may also be considering other criminal charges against other people.

And, would "in a fanny pack owned by HGR but not attached to her body - but nearby" count as "on her person"? Does that cover "in her possession and control"?
Click to expand...
If she left her fanny pack laying around---anyone could have put live ammo in her bag.
 
mickey2942 said:
The protocol outlined by G. Clooney is definitely not helpful for AB. I can easily see criminal charges against AB for negligence.

If the information from G. Clooney is an industry standard and AB did not follow the process, that could be a problem for AB.
Click to expand...
I believe that Clooney did describe the Industry standard.

EVERY actor that is scripted to wield a fire arm on set, has the personal responsibility to check that firearm themselves OR watch closely while the armorer or the AD does so, immediately before they are handed the weapon. That is standard safety protocol.

But AB just accepted that weapon, no questions asked, no personal responsibility taken himself, even though he was planning to point it at crew members only 2 feet away from the muzzle of the gun. AND he had his finger on the trigger while doing so. It was highly negligent, imo.
 
Cryptic said:
I am thinking that the only true deep pockets is Baldwin.

Though the investors maybe wealthy and could be sued simply because they have money and there is the possibility of a settlement, the reasoning seems bad- even by many personal injury suits:

- Boeing designed and built the 737 Max
- Boeing was negligent.
-So, the stock holders can be sued because they facilitated Boeing's negligence?

Likewise, the studios are not Disney Studios with day to day assets. Rather, they seem to be shells that accept investors money, then obtain the human and material resources to produce the movie. They then sit idle until another project is funded?

Thus, perhaps not alot of assets until the next group of investors comes along with another movie project. My guess is that the studios will just fold- well, under their current names and organization.

That could just leave Baldwin as the only deep pocket.
Click to expand...

How deep are AB's pockets? I would assume he has a fairly decent net worth, but are his assets protected somehow for such situations? Just wondering...
 
GatorFL said:
New suit says AB "intentionally" fired the gun at Halyna: Alec Baldwin 'intentionally' fired deadly shot on 'Rust' film set: suit
Click to expand...
“The events that led to the shooting by Mr. Baldwin of a loaded gun constituted intentional acts and/or omission, without any just cause or excuse, on Alec Baldwin’s part or the Producers of ‘Rust,’” the complaint said. “Mr. Baldwin chose to play Russian Roulette with a loaded gun without checking it and without having the Armorer do so. His behavior and that of the Producers on ‘Rust’ were intentional acts and/or omissions.

The fact that live ammunition was allowed on a movie set, that guns and ammunition were left unattended, that the gun in question was handed to Mr. Baldwin by the Assistant director who had no business doing so, the fact that safety bulletins were not promulgated or ignored, coupled with the fact that the scene in question did not call for a gun to be fired at all, makes this a case where injury or death was much more than just a possibility– it was a likely result.”


In the suit, Mitchell claimed, “Alec Baldwin intentionally, without just cause or excuse, cocked and fired and loaded gun even though the upcoming scene to be filmed did not call for the cocking and firing of a firearm.”


Did AB *advertiser censored* the gun before firing? That is bad.

I thought he had said earlier that the gun just went off and he didn't even pull the trigger? But if he actually cocked it and then pulled the trigger, that is a bad legal fact against him.
 
PrairieWind said:
The article I read was pretty vague. I'd like to go find the actual complaint filed. She can probably make a case for emotional distress, but I really question what damages she will be able to prove. She could certainly prove lost income if she was paid hourly depending on what her contract says.
Click to expand...
Yea, but it's unlikely she lost a lot of income from the Rust movie. Low budget, low pay.
 
steeltowngirl said:
What is the basis of her claim? Is she saying future earnings from the movie being shut down?
“Mitchell is suing for an unspecified amount for loss of future earnings, special and general damages, attorney fees and punitive damages.”
Click to expand...
My guess is she is claiming that her severe emotional distress is going to prevent her from working. Cause money from Rust being shut down is not worth suing.
 
steeltowngirl said:
What is the basis of her claim? Is she saying future earnings from the movie being shut down?
“Mitchell is suing for an unspecified amount for loss of future earnings, special and general damages, attorney fees and punitive damages.”
Click to expand...


From the previous Fox link:

“Mitchell is claiming assault, intentional infliction of emotional distress, and deliberate infliction of harm in the lawsuit that also names armorer Hannah Gutierrez Reed, prop master Sarah Zachry and assistant producer Dave Halls.

"I've also lost a new friend who was an extraordinary and rare person, Mitchell said of Hutchins.
The Bonanza Creek Ranch where the movie ‘Rust’ was filmed.
"I've been robbed of my new friend," she added, while also expressing that she was "heartbroken" for Hutchins' husband and son as well as family and friends”
 
katydid23 said:
“The events that led to the shooting by Mr. Baldwin of a loaded gun constituted intentional acts and/or omission, without any just cause or excuse, on Alec Baldwin’s part or the Producers of ‘Rust,’” the complaint said. “Mr. Baldwin chose to play Russian Roulette with a loaded gun without checking it and without having the Armorer do so. His behavior and that of the Producers on ‘Rust’ were intentional acts and/or omissions.

The fact that live ammunition was allowed on a movie set, that guns and ammunition were left unattended, that the gun in question was handed to Mr. Baldwin by the Assistant director who had no business doing so, the fact that safety bulletins were not promulgated or ignored, coupled with the fact that the scene in question did not call for a gun to be fired at all, makes this a case where injury or death was much more than just a possibility– it was a likely result.”


In the suit, Mitchell claimed, “Alec Baldwin intentionally, without just cause or excuse, cocked and fired and loaded gun even though the upcoming scene to be filmed did not call for the cocking and firing of a firearm.”


Did AB *advertiser censored* the gun before firing? That is bad.

I thought he had said earlier that the gun just went off and he didn't even pull the trigger? But if he actually cocked it and then pulled the trigger, that is a bad legal fact against him.
Click to expand...

No way he didn't *advertiser censored* it. No one hands off or handles a Colt revolver with it cocked. And no one can shoot a live round with it uncocked.

If he doesn't remember pulling the trigger, then perhaps he was in a daze or preoccupied or otherwise unable to account for his consciousness at that moment, because he did in fact *advertiser censored* it and pull trigger, unless this happened in an alternate universe of conspiracy theories.
 
katydid23 said:
If she left her fanny pack laying around---anyone could have put live ammo in her bag.
Click to expand...

That wasn't my question. I do realize that. Let's see if I can phrase it better.

My question is that...if I or you or HGR owned a fanny pack, would it be considered a personal possession of mine 0r you or hers, when officers came to her to ask her questions and take her possessions. I think there was probable cause to take her personal possession (the fanny pack) but did it have to be actually attached to her person?

In which case, I would think they needed a warrant. But I'm not sure. That's what I'm asking - are there specific search warrants for HGR's fanny pack. If it is known to be hers, where was it after the shooting?

A more mundane example would be...I have a purse (it's known to be mine), and I'm in an accident and it flies out of the car. It's not on my person. Later, someone picks it up or an investigator finds it. I've already had my "person" searched at the scene, as part of cooperating.

Can LE look through that purse?
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is DeKalb County John Doe (2022)?

Members online

... and 155 more.
Total: 1,258 (members: 156, guests: 1,102)

Online statistics

Members online
156
Guests online
1,102
Total visitors
1,258
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
602,935
Messages
18,149,172
Members
231,591
Latest member
amelia65452
Back
Top