Alec Baldwin fired prop gun, killing 1 on movie set, Oct 2021 #3

[Cool Cats]

Link? I’d like to read more about the coverage here. Tia!

Producers of Alec Baldwin Film Scrutinized After Shooting

LOS ANGELES — Independent film productions that cost more than a few million dollars often carry two forms of insurance in case something goes wrong. Forgoing full coverage, Hollywood veterans say, is less a sign of optimism than corner cutting.

Alec Baldwin’s now-infamous “Rust” had only one.

Chubb, the insurance giant, sold Mr. Baldwin and his five fellow “Rust” producers a package covering a wide range of potential problems, including damage to equipment (a cracked camera lens), injury to cast and crew (a broken wrist after a fall) and the worst-case situation of a death on the set.

What the “Rust” producers did not secure is a completion bond — an often-expensive package that serves as a type of umbrella policy should anything horrific happen and the production can’t be completed. Such a policy costs about 2 percent of a film’s budget.

“Producers who don’t want to bond are only doing so to save money,” said Randy Greenberg, a producer, film finance consultant and former studio executive. “And it’s the last place where you want to save money.”

The producing team declined to comment for this article, although a spokeswoman confirmed the insurance details.

 

[Cryptic]

I have a question, hope it is not too dumb. In the Colt videos I've watched, they always talk about leaving one chamber empty because if you don't, the gun goes off very easily (at least I think that is what they were saying). Could the fact that HGR might have loaded 6 rounds been one of the many reasons this happened?

Your question is not dumb at all.

As a member knowledgeable about fire arms implied, the exact answer to your question is..... "Maybe, but probably not".

The weapon in question was evidently a reproduction and not an original vintage Colt. Several Italian companies and U.S. companies manufacture, or have manufactured high quality reproductions of old west guns.

And now..... the "Maybe, but probably not":

The early reproductions were 100% faithful to the originals- right down to the mechanical flaws. But.... later production runs include modern safety features (transfer bar?) that eliminate it.

Here's the personal injury firm hired by Halyna's husba
Los Angeles Personal Injury Lawyer | Over $3 Billion Won

Jeez, like seemingly all personal injury attorneys, the website includes alot of hype. To my knowledge, the Mandalay Bay lawsuits were handled by many different firms- yet these guys give the impression that they alone won 800 million.

Got to love 160. 5 million dollar verdict and the wow.... 4.9 billion dollar verdict (yawn). Verdicts in lawsuits mean nothing- and doubly so in law suit crazed California.

18 million dollar ruling against Uncle Sam? Sounds good, but they forget to state that Uncle Sam has sovereign immunity and thus he decides alone what he pays.

I wonder how much was actually collected- especially from the 160.5 million night club beat down verdict? Naturally..... they don't say. Though they do refer to a 19 million dollar settlement, it can be hard to know if this amount is also spun hype.

 

[CrimeAway]

The reason why the original Colt design is not safe with six rounds in it is if the gun is carried with the hammer down, or not cocked, on a live round it's possible for a blow to the back of the hammer causing the gun to fire.

I don't think that applies to this case. JMO.

I'm pretty sure that I read that only 5 rounds should be loaded in this gun also, and for the same reason. I can't recall exactly where I read it right now, so please take it as JMO until proven otherwise.

 

[kaen]

And by suggesting sabotage, HGR is admitting she had eyes off of the gun and the ammo, leaving it out for someone else to mess with.

It spreads the blame around. She inspected, loaded them with the "blanks", and socked the guns. BUT, the AD was the one who took the gun, didn't inspect it properly, declared it cold and handed it to the actor.

She is culpable for not keeping her armor secured. If she had that AD would not have been able to by-pass her. I am sure she will talk about his tyrannical pressure, lack of safety meetings and rushing all to keep on schedule. Her pockets are not deep so unless she has criminal liability, I don't forsee her getting in deep with a civil suit--- she would be named, I am sure but she doesn't have assets that would be worth pinning everything on her.

The AD is in a boat load of trouble (IMO) criminally and civilly. He didn't follow procedures across the board. People were writing emails about it. People quit about it. He took a gun, didn't inspect, didn't due his due diligence. He was the due diligence man on this set-- he coordinated and was supposed to insure safe working conditions, adherence to procedure and was acting on behalf of the production company as their eyes and ears on this set. I believe he will be charged. I also believe that he will be the main focus of lawsuits as he is the front line production person in charge of health and safety of the crew, actors, and set. If he is found guilty of a crime, it will make the lawsuit go that much easier.

I would imagine that this will be settled civilly behind closed doors in a way that supports this family. No one in the production company or any of the principal employees (director, AD, etc) will want to have to go through depositions and the grueling aspects of trial. No insurance company wants that either.

 

[JudgeJoe]

I'm pretty sure that I read that only 5 rounds should be loaded in this gun also, and for the same reason. I can't recall exactly where I read it right now, so please take it as JMO until proven otherwise.

I remember it from the video OP linked upstream. Iirc

 

[mickey2942]

The game changer could be who did "plinking" and when...and what testimony is available. That could definitely add culpability.

Imagine, if someone did go "plinking" with live ammunition during lunch. After HGR had "secured" the guns she filled with dummies with socks on the cart, prior to when Halls picked up the gun.

That could be very interesting.

 

[Marysmith]

She put socks over them to prevent people from picking them up???!

“Robert Gorence, another attorney for Gutierrez-Reed, told the outlet that she loaded the guns with dummy rounds for an afternoon filming session, placed socks over them to prevent passersby from picking them up, and went off to lunch. Was there a duty to safeguard them 24/7?” Gorence said. “The answer is no, because there were no live rounds.”

“The account contradicts a Santa Fe Sheriff’s Office affidavit that said Reed told investigators the gun had been locked in a safe during a lunch break prior to the fatal shooting during a rehearsal.

But in an earlier interview, the lawyers had also said that they thought the weapon may have been sabotaged by someone else”

https://nypost.com/2021/11/03/alec-baldwins-rust-gun-left-unattended-before-halyna-hutchins-shot/
Alec Baldwin's 'Rust' gun left unattended before Halyna Hutchins shot

This is insane.

 

[Cryptic]

I would imagine that this will be settled civilly behind closed doors in a way that supports this family. No one in the production company or any of the principal employees (director, AD, etc) will want to have to go through depositions and the grueling aspects of trial. No insurance company wants that either.

I think some aspects may keep it from being settled civilly or soon:

Does the insurance policy cover accidents resulting from gross negligence? If so, would they refuse to provide the coverage?

It is very likely that none of the principal employees (Director, AD and armorer) simply don't have the kind of assets- or the insurance to satisfy a lawsuit. The lack of cash is going to lead to the injury attorneys looking for other targets.....

That leaves AB- who is also the most removed from the accident responsibility wise. AB is evidently worth 20 million.

I bet he is dead set on keeping hold of the vast majority of it. My guess is that he will offer a settlement- but also make it clear that he is not going to be the one left holding the bag because he has assets. He can fund appeals. I imagine that he could also make his assets, well, uhmmm..... "hard to recover" if he truly needs to.

The attorneys will also probably target the production company- but that is not exactly Disney in regards to assets. Rather, it seems to be an investment shell that funds individual movies.

In short, if the insurance company bails out, it could leave a situation where the principal actors have little assets and those with assets inclined to fight for them.

 

[Cryptic]

I just had a short text exchange with a relative who is a lawyer (Florida) and knows of the law firm hired by Halyna's husband. She said Brian Parish has 9 figure verdicts and likely will get a huge verdict in this case.

No doubt he does. One of his hype verdict that he cites was for what, 4.9 billion? Wow, California juries have really taken off.

But....I wonder what is actual collections are after appeals and uncollectable "walk aways"? Naturally...... Brian Parish does not really seem to say.

Of course, even that is nothing to sneeze at, especially if he handled alot of the Mandalay Bay settlements. Then again, how much did they really collect on the hyped 160 million night club beating lawsuit?

They do cite mega settlements from government agencies though. Other cases are simply verdicts against government entities- all of whom have sovereign immunity.

In the end, getting through the hype fog can be hard.....

 

[Deleted member 39678]

The game changer could be who did "plinking" and when...and what testimony is available. That could definitely add culpability.

Imagine, if someone did go "plinking" with live ammunition during lunch. After HGR had "secured" the guns she filled with dummies with socks on the cart, prior to when Halls picked up the gun.

That could be very interesting.

As for accusations that there was shooting practices on set, Luper said he didn't personally "have any experience with that."

"I don't know about those claims beyond what was reported in the media. I did hear distant gunfire on the property but there is a nearby national guard armory so all of us would kind of chalk it up to that. But in hindsight, it could have been," he said.

I wish Luper would have said when he heard this gunfire. It doesn't surprise me that they figured the sounds where not from crew members firing prop guns because everyone knows that live ammo is not allowed on set. JMO.

'Rust' first camera assistant claims Alec Baldwin shooting a result of lack of gun safety protocols

 

[JudgeJoe]

I think some aspects may keep it from being settled civilly or soon:

Does the insurance policy cover accidents resulting from gross negligence? If so, would they refuse to provide the coverage?

It is very likely that none of the principal employees (Director, AD and armorer) simply don't have the kind of assets- or the insurance to satisfy a lawsuit. The lack of cash is going to lead to the injury attorneys looking for other targets.....

That leaves AB- who is also the most removed from the accident responsibility wise. AB is evidently worth 20 million.

I bet he is dead set on keeping hold of the vast majority of it. My guess is that he will offer a settlement- but also make it clear that he is not going to be the one left holding the bag because he has assets. He can fund appeals. I imagine that he could also make his assets, well, uhmmm..... "hard to recover" if he truly needs to.

The attorneys will also probably target the production company- but that is not exactly Disney in regards to assets. Rather, it seems to be an investment shell that funds individual movies.

In short, if the insurance company bails out, it could leave a situation where the principal actors have little assets and those with assets inclined to fight for them.

I agree, but all of that is one big fat PR nightmare for anyone in this industry. They’ll all be dropped from consideration for new projects like hot potatoes, imo. Which may be the next best result if seeking justice in a non-fundable wrongful death suit. Imo

 

[al66pine]

Eating Humble Pie. Me.
Not being aware of "gun socks," I made sarc post about them. Well, I should not have been such a smart-azz, because @Cool Cats (TYVM ) posted link to e-tailer selling gun socks.

Learning something new here all the time, just like @JudgeJoe said.

 

[steeltowngirl]

If HGR attempts to go after after the ammunitions maker for allegedly mixing live rounds in the “dummy” box, it is doubtful she’d succeed - due to the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act.

Public Law 109-92
109th Congress
An Act

To prohibit civil liability actions from being brought or continued against manufacturers, distributors, dealers, or importers of firearms or ammunition for damages, injunctive or other relief resulting from the misuse of their products by others. <<NOTE: Oct. 26, 2005 - [S. 397]>>

Text - S.397 - 109th Congress (2005-2006): Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act

 

[katydid23]

I'm kind of focused on the Rittenhouse deal, so haven't been keeping up on this situation with all the updates, but, my question is, have they clarified at any time that HGR did another check on the weapon/ammo AFTER it was removed from the safe by the props manager and brought to her after lunch?

Good question. Here is the latest info from her, through her attorney. I am not sure he is really helping her that much though. Let's unpack his latest comments:


“You can’t rule anybody out at this point,” he continued. “We know there was a live round in a box of dummy rounds that shouldn’t have been there. At least one live round. We have people who had left the set — who walked out because they were disgruntled. We have a time frame of between 11 and 1 approximately that day in which the firearms at times were unattended. So, there was opportunity to tamper with this scene.”

[ok, so the attorney may be implying that she never checked it after 1? Because he is saying someone could have tampered with it at lunchtime---thus he is admitting she left guns unattended from 11 to 1 and never checked again? ]


Gorence said the guns were locked in a safe but that the ammunition was “unattended” in a prop truck “at all times” during the production. He said a tray which contained the guns was also unattended as the crew ate lunch the day the shooting occurred.

“She had two roles on that film set,” Bowles said while noting that Gutierrez was both a part-time armorer and a prop assistant. He said Gutierrez put the guns on a prop cart before the crew broke for lunch. Assistant director Halls took control of the weapons while Guiterrez attended to her other job, the attorney added.

[So her attorney appears to be telling the world that his client loaded and checked the weapons before 11 am---then left them unattended on a tray on the set, with ammo also unattended---and never rechecked the weapons before Hall picked the weapon up, and he also fAiled to recheck it. ]

Gorence said Gutierrez “did not” check the guns again after lunch, but he reiterated that what was scheduled to occur in the church was a “tech prep” that involved “positioning cameras” only. (He appeared to tell the story differently on ABC’s Good Morning America.)

“Hannah was not in the church, and that’s really significant,” Gorence said. “If there was something that was going to involve one of the firearms, she had to be there. She wasn’t in the church because it wasn’t set up to have that dynamic of — ‘we’re going to use one of these firearms.'”


[Alright, Hold Up---this ^^^seems to be conflicting info. Attorney started by saying she loaded 6 dummies into the weapon and left it on the tray to be used in the rehearsal after showing the weapon to the AD. --- BUT THEN he says > She wasn’t in the church because it wasn’t set up to have that dynamic of — ‘we’re going to use one of these firearms.'”]

WHAT? She loaded the weapon with 6 dummies, showed it to the AD, left it out on a tray to be used---but then says it was just a camera angle rehearsal and no guns were going to be used? That does not really make any sense, IMO]



'Rust' Armorer's Lawyers Say 'Disgruntled' Person May Have Tried to 'Sabotage' Alec Baldwin Film

 

[everybodhi]

I'm pretty sure that I read that only 5 rounds should be loaded in this gun also, and for the same reason. I can't recall exactly where I read it right now, so please take it as JMO until proven otherwise.

Wouldn’t HGR herself then be suspect in the proposed sabotage? She loaded the gun.

And after AB fired the live round that killed HH, when they checked the gun, there was still another live round left in the chamber, four dummies and a live bullet.
Which means AB not only fired the colt loaded with 6 rounds, two were live rounds.
(According to Halls' statement to detectives).

A Call of ‘Cold Gun!’ A Live Round. And Death on a Film Set.

Mamie Mitchell, the movie’s script supervisor, ran out of the church, cellphone in hand, and dialed 911.

“We’ve had two people accidentally shot on a movie set by a prop gun,” Ms. Mitchell told the dispatcher. “We need help immediately.”

At 1:48 p.m., the sheriff’s department was dispatched to the ranch.

Back on the set, Mr. Halls picked up the revolver from a church pew and handed it to Ms. Gutierrez-Reed, who opened it up to see what was inside. Mr. Halls told a detective that he saw at least four rounds with a hole in the side, which sometimes indicate that a round is a dummy. (Dummy rounds contain no gunpowder and are used to resemble bullets on camera.)
But there was another round in the gun, he told a detective, one with just a casing, no cap, and which did not have the pierced hole.

 

[branmuffin]

And her attorney just said she loaded SIX dummies into that weapon right before it was used that day. Does that mean a bullet is missing?

According to experts the Pietta live fire revolver should only use five bullets because the firing pin rests on the cap if the cylinder is full. If you know what you're doing you should also be putting five dummies and five blanks in the weapon to be consistent. Because HGR asked the AD for the weapon after the shooting she took out the spent casing. Or was it a spent casing and another cartridge? With all the chaos who really watched what she was doing? Did she do this before LE arrived on scene? Did someone secure the weapon until they came?

 

[MikeF]

I'm pretty sure that I read that only 5 rounds should be loaded in this gun also, and for the same reason. I can't recall exactly where I read it right now, so please take it as JMO until proven otherwise.

Read (or saw) the same thing and commented earlier.

 

[SuziQ]

I think it's only going to get more bizarre. Everyone is pointing fingers at everyone else the last couple of days, and now we have mysterious saboteurs in the mix too.

SODDI. I wish someone would find this "dude". He's responsible for a lot of crimes.

Moo.

 

[SuziQ]

I stopped reading this thread a few days ago so I dont know the latest updates.
But I have just read DM (the link which I sent here a few mins ago) and my blood boiled!
I mean the statement of armourer's lawyers.
Are they for real?
Have they no shame?
I understand their task is to defend their client but to accuse the crew who left a day earlier of putting a real bullet into the Colt is unbelievable!
They left b/c of horrific conditions on this set!
If I were one of them I would think of suing for these horrible accusations!
The lady didnt do her job - and that is the truth!

I'm angry after reading of her leaving everything unlocked and unattended. And her lawyers think this is going to help her? It makes her look negligent as h*ll.

Moo.

 

[al66pine]

Gun Storage?

If they are going to use this bizarre sock narrative blankets or rugs would have been a better cover up.

@Luna20 Rugs for floor coverings?
Or “gun rugs” basically padded, zippered cases to protect guns from being scratched and from scratching tables/furniture the gun is laid on. They are more structured than gun socks, but gun socks & gun rugs do not secure a gun against tampering.

Image source, amazon.com

As @Cool Cats said, to help prevent tampering, a gun needs to be in a case like the image in post 737. A lockable case. And. Actually. Locked. Of course even that does not ensure against guns being stolen/borrowed, then tampered w. and returned to the set, say w live rounds.
Would a gun safe be used on a set w. many guns? But ultimately, cast & crew have to handle, guns, ammo, & other weapons safely. My2cts.