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

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Status
Not open for further replies.
Alec Baldwin is the only person who was present at the scene of the crime who is talking...continuously.... and waiving Splenda packets from his newest adoring fans in our face. He is also the only one who has NOT yet cooperated regarding turning over their cell phones. Both the armorer and the AD have turned them over. But not AB. We must first suffer through more of his endless self-promoting nonsense, which is nothing but trying to sway the current and negative public opinion of him, IMO.

Has any other actor who was on scene said a word to the public? Zippo as far as I know. They are all quietly waiting (like me) for the investigation to conclude.

He's still not doing himself any favors, IMO

And his Lawyer(s) need more scotch!
 
Actors & Skill Sets?
@MsMarple sbm rbm Thanks for your post, quote, & link. Not commenting about other skills, but disagreeing re an actor's need to how to use firearm in this particular instance.

Iirc* the armorer did not hand the gun to him directly and did not advise him directly of its status. Seems that if Alec had opened the cylinder, he could seen "something" in the chambers and could have asked the armorer to verify that they were what the script called for - dummies or blanks. Presumably not live rounds. And if he did not know how to find the cylinder release latch to open the cylinder, he could have asked armorer to personally check status. my2ct

Did his ego/vanity/self conceit get in the way of asking a young female to assist w this safety issue, despite her role as armorer? Just wondering.
______________________________
* Stories about how Alec did obtain the gun seem quite, umm, fluid. Did Alec pick it up from table or did someone hand to him?

The requirement for the actor to know his/her particular gun is very old and well-respected - and definitely would have saved Halyna's life.

Alec Baldwin apparently did not know that in a 1963 reproduction of an 1880's Colt .45 revolver, the hammer could be "fanned" (used as the trigger). He doesn't even know what triggers the gun to fire!

All persons holding an operating firearm should handle it in a non-reckless manner (i.e., follow the rules of gun safety; the first of which is to always assume the gun is loaded). On most film sets, on a day when guns are used, there's yet another pre-filming meeting to reiterate the rules of gun safety, but also to remind people about the workings of their own guns. The armorer should state what's inside (and demonstrate that) but also reiterate which actions involving the gun could be problematic (if blanks had been in the gun, Halyna could still have been seriously injured by Baldwin pulling back the hammer all the way, and then releasing it - especially if it's a model with a firing pin on the hammer, which I believe it is).

Armorer should have indicated which guns on the cart where which (there were two guns incapable of firing any blanks or bullets; those were for rehearsals; they were rehearsing). ALL of that should have been repeated each day (some sets do it twice a day - right before each block of filming).

That's how other productions avoid tragedies of this kind. Alec's own words state that HGR's "lesson" was simply about how to act as if firing real bullets - not anything about how a Colt 45 really works.

Alec says he was handed the gun. DH originally said he handed Alec the gun. Whether "cold gun" was actually said is in dispute, but it doesn't matter, as no one is supposed to point a gun at anyone on a set (Alec even said that he had been taught to always "use an angle" but he didn't, in this instance - he forgot his gun training). A refresher was surely in order.

I know from years of teaching that people easily forget things they don't hear frequently - and that it takes 3-4 reiterations of most important points to get most people to learn the lesson. Alec clearly hadn't used a Colt .45 often or at all, didn't know this particular gun, didn't check it in even a cursory manner to ensure it held dummies, and didn't ask whoever handed him the gun to follow the protocol that all film sets are supposed to use (via union requirements).
 
With respect, not exactly "just like." Latest model, brand new, clean, chambered for .45 ACP instead of .45 Long Colt. I suggest waiting for the FBI report.
I really doubt the FBI will find the gun used by AB was broken. That's the only way the gun could have fired the way AB said it did. Fully pulling the hammer back and letting go of it without pulling the trigger back.

If the gun was broken it would have been clear to whoever loaded it. You have to pull the hammer back and let it rest at the half *advertiser censored* notch. JMO.
 
Is Alec Plausibly Mystified about the Truth?
Login • Instagram ....Then he takes a page out of OJ's book, and tells us that he is looking for the truth about what really happened....
@katydid23 bbm sbm Thanks for your post quoting Alec's IG. If anyone missed it, scroll back to #837 & read it.

Yes, parallel: Both OJ & Alec said they want to learn the "truth." But -
- OJ claimed not to be at scene where Nicole & Ron were killed;
- Alec was there ............ (incontrovertibly at scene of shooting)
w firearm ...................... (incontrovertibly loaded w live round)
which was fired ............. (incontrovertibly, fired)
killing Halyna ............... (incontrovertibly, the CoD & MoD)
& injuring the AD .......... (incontrovertibly the cause of injury)
in front of witnesses ...... (incontrovertibly multiple witnesses).

You want to know what happened?
You pulled the trigger, Alec.
That's the truth.
Maybe not the truth you were pretending to be looking for, imo.
 
Last edited:
So, AB will give his phone, with a specific type of search warrant. It sounds like to me, that he wants any messages to his wife excluded, because they were probably love letters. :rolleyes:

The search warrant can't be general for dates of shooting, but specify exactly what the police are looking for, to whom, and what parameters. That is tricky now. With electronic data.

It is not unlike a search warrant for a home, the police have to specify what they are searching for. I can see the parallels and logic.

I think two ways about this:
1. If you have nothing to hide, hand it over.
2. The police could find something, that AB doesn't think is important, but are clues to creating a case against AB, in which case, limiting what the police can look for is smart.
 
So, AB will give his phone, with a specific type of search warrant. It sounds like to me, that he wants any messages to his wife excluded, because they were probably love letters. :rolleyes:

The search warrant can't be general for dates of shooting, but specify exactly what the police are looking for, to whom, and what parameters. That is tricky now. With electronic data.

It is not unlike a search warrant for a home, the police have to specify what they are searching for. I can see the parallels and logic.

I think two ways about this:
1. If you have nothing to hide, hand it over.
2. The police could find something, that AB doesn't think is important, but are clues to creating a case against AB, in which case, limiting what the police can look for is smart.

He has a plan, it’s not a plan of cooperation. This all reflects poorly on him.

The OJ comparison is spot on!
 
So, AB will give his phone, with a specific type of search warrant. It sounds like to me, that he wants any messages to his wife excluded, because they were probably love letters. :rolleyes:

The search warrant can't be general for dates of shooting, but specify exactly what the police are looking for, to whom, and what parameters. That is tricky now. With electronic data.

It is not unlike a search warrant for a home, the police have to specify what they are searching for. I can see the parallels and logic.

I think two ways about this:
1. If you have nothing to hide, hand it over.
2. The police could find something, that AB doesn't think is important, but are clues to creating a case against AB, in which case, limiting what the police can look for is smart.
I know that when my husband is working on location on a set, he texts me often, usually to vent or complain about something to get it off his chest, while under pressure.
Also, he mentions it if he messes up or makes a mistake, as a way of trying to think things through----I am like his sounding board---so he might text me, explaining that he made a stupid decision about something and is trying to figure out best way to reverse the error....

If something very bad happened on one of his projects, and someone died, and his cell was taken by LE because he was one of the producers, I think his texts between me and him would be very important to the case. If only because he would be explaining what happened in a very transparent way---which I am sure AB did to his wife as well.

For him to say that all the messages to his wife are irrelevant is ridiculous. When this horrible stuff happened, I am sure he sent some very relevant texts to his wife. Who wouldn't?

ETA: Note to self---maybe I should tell him to stop sending incriminating texts? ;)
 
Last edited:
I know that when my husband is working on location on a set, he texts me quite often, usually to vent or complain about something to get it off his chest, while under pressure.
Also, he often mentions it if he messes up or makes a mistake, as a way of trying to think things through----I am like his sounding board---so he might text me, explaining that he made a stupid decision about something and is trying to figure out best way to reverse the error....

If something very bad happened on one of his projects, and someone died, and his cell was taken by LE because he was one of the producers, I think his texts between me and him would be very important to the case. If only because he would be explaining what happened in a very transparent way---which I am sure AB did to his wife as well.

For him to say that all the messages to his wife are irrelevant is ridiculous. When this horrible stuff happened, I am sure he sent some very relevant texts to his wife. Who wouldn't?

ETA: Note to self---maybe I should tell him to stop sending incriminating texts? ;)

Agree. That is why I think those are the most crucial texts.

I hardly ever text. Probably a good thing.

Phones have changed, because before, once a text was deleted, it was gone. Now, I guess they are on some cloud storage, somewhere (?).
 
So, AB will give his phone, with a specific type of search warrant. It sounds like to me, that he wants any messages to his wife excluded, because they were probably love letters. :rolleyes:

The search warrant can't be general for dates of shooting, but specify exactly what the police are looking for, to whom, and what parameters. That is tricky now. With electronic data.

It is not unlike a search warrant for a home, the police have to specify what they are searching for. I can see the parallels and logic.

I think two ways about this:
1. If you have nothing to hide, hand it over.
2. The police could find something, that AB doesn't think is important, but are clues to creating a case against AB, in which case, limiting what the police can look for is smart.

The search warrant, as it is written, is a standard, cut and paste "phone search warrant." It wants to look at everything on his phone, for obvious reasons.

I suppose they could try and figure out when Rust first was developed/discussed (because figuring out who was in charge of the production seems seriously important). But since those dates are likely dependent on Baldwin's own phone, it would be a wide window.

It's simply not uncommon for LE to ask for (and receive) a warrant for "phone and all its contents," which is what the NM signed off on.

NY uses similar search warrants in criminal cases, so I'm not sure what the big deal is. Indeed, someone who merely takes a picture of a policeman out on the street can sometimes have that phone confiscated (interfering with an investigation). That would be more controversial than having a judge look at phone data already obtained (since others have given over their phones without warrants), and deciding that Baldwin's phone needs to be looked at.

Frankly, he ought to have just turned it over earlier and gotten a new phone (and possibly an entire new account - because the warrant includes linked accounts to include texts, photos, phone calls and messaging apps). I wouldn't be surprised if that's what his lawyers told him. I can just hear Alec saying, "Well, I'm going to take this to the Supreme Court then, that's private!"

It's always hard to be treated as a criminal - which happens to regular people on traffic stops.

We'll see how this goes for him. I bet they already have the Verizon records (and probably iCloud stuff as well). The phone itself is interesting, because of what he may have tried to delete.
 
So, AB will give his phone, with a specific type of search warrant. It sounds like to me, that he wants any messages to his wife excluded, because they were probably love letters. :rolleyes:

The search warrant can't be general for dates of shooting, but specify exactly what the police are looking for, to whom, and what parameters. That is tricky now. With electronic data.

It is not unlike a search warrant for a home, the police have to specify what they are searching for. I can see the parallels and logic.

I think two ways about this:
1. If you have nothing to hide, hand it over.
2. The police could find something, that AB doesn't think is important, but are clues to creating a case against AB, in which case, limiting what the police can look for is smart.

JMO, his request sounds very reasonable. This is new territory for constitutional right and search warrants for cell phones. We've all followed cases here a long time and we know how search warrants work. This isn't rocket science.

Investigators have to demonstrate to a judge there's reason to think a person has information that will help with the investigation. They have rules that require them to list the items or kind of information they'll be looking for and why they're relevant. Investigators are no longer allowed to go to someone's home or office and seize all their possessions, etc. unless there's a reason. Why should a cell phone be any different? Any information on Baldwin's phone that isn't relative to the investigation should not be copied or downloaded, nor should any of that personal/immaterial information be shared with strangers, the news media, etc.

It's pretty basic advice to any American citizen that they shouldn't allow a member of LE to search their home, car, etc. without a warrant. LE should never ask a citizen to submit to a search of their personal property without one.

Search Warrant

Baldwin isn't suspected of terrorism, so his rights regarding the Fourth Amendment should apply. There shouldn't be an exception just because he's a celebrity. LE should not be allowed to download, access, use or share any information on his (or any American's) cell phone that isn't relevant to the investigation. They certainly shouldn't share data with the news media, tabloids, friends, political operatives or crazy groups on social media.

That's just advice I remember learning back in the days of college campus demonstrations, etc. Never let any LE search your room, home, car, etc. without a warrant. Be nice, polite and friendly, but say no. If they com to your home or apartment, step out on your porch and close the door behind you. Don't let them in and don't let them search without a warrant. Be polite.

In looking at the link above, when it comes to searching for Electronic Data, these days Rule 41 applies. That rule says if someone is suspected of being a terrorist, all the information in their phone can be downloaded during a search and examined later. When someone isn't accused of being a terrorist, JMO, the search should follow the same rules as any other item taken under a search warrant.

Sounds like the investigators are working with Baldwin's attorney to review the data on his phone in order to download the relevant data that pertains to the SW. Police should not be publicly complaining about this nor talking about it to the news media. That's very unprofessional. I've been to New Mexico before, but if this is the way they do things there, I probably won't go again.


JMO IANAL
 
Is the phone being sought AB's personal cell phone as opposed to a "company" phone used for business during the filming of the movie? Just asking out of curiosity. Would it be typical for the actor/producer to use his personal phone?
 
Is the phone being sought AB's personal cell phone as opposed to a "company" phone used for business during the filming of the movie? Just asking out of curiosity. Would it be typical for the actor/producer to use his personal phone?

It's his own personal phone with personal messages on it to his wife and other personal business.

Yes it's typical to use a personal phone for business calls and texts.

“That is a process that takes time,” he (Alec Baldwin) said. “They have to specify what exactly they want. They can’t just go through your phone and take, you know, your photos or your love letters to your wife or what have you.”
 
Last edited:
It's his own personal phone with personal messages on it to his wife and other personal business.

Yes it's typical to use a personal phone for business calls and texts.

“That is a process that takes time,” he (Alec Baldwin) said. “They have to specify what exactly they want. They can’t just go through your phone and take, you know, your photos or your love letters to your wife or what have you.”

But the detectives don't care about his love letters or family photos or anything like that. They just want information about Rust, and about anything connected to the incident and relevant circumstances prior to the incident.

He doesn't need to worry about love notes to his wife because nobody cares.
 
But the detectives don't care about his love letters or family photos or anything like that. They just want information about Rust, and about anything connected to the incident and relevant circumstances prior to the incident.

He doesn't need to worry about love notes to his wife because nobody cares.

True, so all they have to do is download only the information related to Rust and the incident.

They don't need to download, copy, examine and share all the data on his cell phone. He probably has private phone numbers for a lot of famous people, among other very personal data.

Sounds like they've worked it out just fine.
 
I think AB is concerned about any texts he may have sent, discussing the prior misfires on set, and discussing the crew that walked off in protest of lack of safety protocols, etc. Texts like that could show that he was well aware that things were shaky and protocols were not effective.

And I think it is possible he sent some messages like that to his wife. Which is why he wants to keep those messages separate. JMO
 
True, so all they have to do is download only the information related to Rust and the incident.

They don't need to download, copy, examine and share all the data on his cell phone. He probably has private phone numbers for a lot of famous people, among other very personal data.

Sounds like they've worked it out just fine.
But they can't know which messages may have relevant info. He may have messaged his wife about the incident several times and revealed important info.
 
But they can't know which messages may have relevant info. He may have messaged his wife about the incident several times and revealed important info.

Sure they can. If there's a text to his wife about relevant happenings on the set, they can read that. If there are texts To his wife not relevant to the case, they cant download them.

Didn't Kobe Bryant's wife recently sue LA Sheriffs officeOr other LE for officers sharing photos of the dead bodies of her husband and daughter?

A well known celebrity like AB can easily be taken ad antage of by members of LE, Etc. If they start sharing personal photos, texts, contact info, etc. Celebrities have a right to privacy like any one else.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
91
Guests online
177
Total visitors
268

Forum statistics

Threads
608,562
Messages
18,241,363
Members
234,401
Latest member
CRIM1959
Back
Top