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

[Satchie]

Yep. "Negligence" is probably the word that sums it up best. And negligent homicide is a charge that comes to mind. Problem will be determining where the negligence occurred and who is actually responsible. The young woman who was hired after a more experienced armourer said the job could be done as a part time job split between armourer and prop wrangler? The AD with a known history of careless who called it a "cold gun" when in fact he didn't know whether it was or wasn't? The actor who didn't ask to see a demonstration of empty chambers? The producer who hired the armourer and the AD and made the decision to skimp on staff? Who was the producer-in-charge that day? Was there one? There was a producer on set, but was he doing his job as producer? Why did so many people walk off out of safety concerns just that morning? What will they say? Is it true that this was the second time a gun at gone off when it ought to to have?

Lots to litigate. Sheriff said they had almost 100 people still to interview...

There is a big difference between criminal law and civil law.

Police cannot press charges based on someone failing to follow industry guidelines, or a vague sense that this was a clusterf**k. Police and prosecutors must look to the criminal statutes for language that exactly fits the alleged crime, and as well, they must have proof 'beyond a reasonable doubt'. The cost of the investigation is carried by the government and they don't spend taxpayer's money pursuing people who jaywalk, etc. As well, the result of a successful prosecution means being sent to jail or monitored probation (at considerable taxpayer's expense) and having a criminal record, which has serious personal consequences.

Civil law (suing) is a much looser set of standards. Firstly, there is no actual legal code that has to be applied, everything is open to claims of harm, it is mostly a matter of persuasion by the claimant. Secondly, there is no burden of proof, there just has to be a probability. Thirdly, there is no punishment, there is only financial compensation at stake, and the less money an individual has, the less likely they will be sued because they have no assets to be claimed if the suit wins. And finally, the cost of the actual lawyers and trial are not paid for by government but by the individuals, and these are so extreme that most people (or their insurance companies) will settle, rather than continue the suit.

So the two aspects of 'justice' are completely separate. I would say most of the arguments being made here are potentially relevant towards Ms. Hutchins husband filing a civil lawsuit for financial compensation, rather than about anyone breaking an actual law.

JMO

 

[jjenny]

I agree, that’s commendable. He is taking responsibility for his part in all of it despite that no one else is. He must feel somewhat disappointed that he stands alone regarding accountability…so far.

He said that before he got a lawyer, LOL. That's why some people should think twice before talking to the police.

 

[jjenny]

I don't understand what they mean by Hall "pulling the gun three times."

Pulling it from the holster? Baldwin was supposed to pull the gun, point it at camera then shoot at a rival.

 

[jjenny]

I don't understand what they mean by Hall "pulling the gun three times."

Pulling it from the holster? Baldwin was supposed to pull the gun, point it at camera then shoot at a rival.

 

[ilovewings]

Like most accidents or horrible occurrences like this one, It is a train of mistakes or missed opportunities that could have stopped the fatal action anywhere along the line. We know the ending of the train, LE will find the beginning of it. New laws won't help. They didn't follow simple rules this time and it cost a life.

Truer words were never spoken: right on the money

 

[jjenny]

Here is the article describing latest developments.
The day Alec Baldwin shot Halyna Hutchins and Joel Souza (yahoo.com)

 

[MikeF]

Reallllllly starting to feel this way too! Could be somebody didn’t even have an actual intended victim. Maybe somebody just wanted to cause chaos on set, even a death. Anyone would do?

It's run through my mind as well that possibly someone had an axe to grind with HGR or even Hall, and they figured the mistake of live ammo in the gun would likely end careers. They didn't count on the fact a person could be killed. Maybe they just thought the bullet would hit some random object?

 

[mickey2942]

'Rust' armorer Hannah Gutierrez-Reed breaks her silence, blames producers for 'unsafe' set

There really needs to be a clear timeline of events. Each article is either just repeating parts of other articles, because I have not actually seen a detailed timeline of events.

This article seems to state that HGR had the gun handed to her from a locked and secured area by "Zachary". (?), HGR gave the gun to Halls, who is supposed to check the gun, prior to giving it to Baldwin.

And, apparently, ammunition is just loose, on a cart, not secured.

Again, the apparent lackadaisical attitude, lack of protocol, and strict adherence to normal safety standards when using guns is evident.

I don't see any indication of documentation, sign off sheets, checks, with verification and signatures.

Safety and security goes from the top down. So, people at the top, who were supposed to institute and manage the crew/set need to be held accountable.

 

[MsMarple]

It's an armorer's job to know what ammo is on the set. If somebody brought it onto the set, the armorer should take notice. They also shouldn't leave ammo un-attended.

I haven’t been able to find information about any record keeping the armorer would use to track inventory of the guns, blanks and dummies.

If only for budgetary and liability concerns wouldn’t the armorer record what’s been bought or rented and what’s used each day?

There must be some system in place but no one has talked about it so far.

@mickey2942 I see you’re asking too!

 

[jjenny]

If it was a replica, then the cylinder could have been spun, but if it was a vintage Colt, as first reported, the cylinder's bullets cannot be seen by opening and spinning the cylinder. The checker has to move the cylinder and open a gate on the right hand side of the gun to see if a road is in there.

If there were just rehearsing, then no one's finger should have been on the trigger, because getting shot with a blank (with BBs?) could easily take out an eye at that range.

I do wonder what the plan was. While filming (later, after rehearsal) was Baldwin supposed to shoot BB's at the expensive camera and the person behind it? Or were they set up to protect the camera and the DP? I don't see any plexiglass in the scene. If the BB had been fired past the camera (camera set higher so it couldn't be shot), with the right lens it would have still look as if it was going toward the camera. But...surely they would have cleared people away from the path of even a blank round?

BBs are in dummy round to make noise to distinguish it from the real ammo. The BB's don't come out of a dummy. Dummy is completely inert, no noise, and no projectile is coming from it.

 

[Dotta]

Alec Baldwin shooting highlights lack of uniform safety regulations on sets across the country

 

[Luna20]

There is a big difference between criminal law and civil law.

Police cannot press charges based on someone failing to follow industry guidelines, or a vague sense that this was a clusterf**k. Police and prosecutors must look to the criminal statutes for language that exactly fits the alleged crime, and as well, they must have proof 'beyond a reasonable doubt'. The cost of the investigation is carried by the government and they don't spend taxpayer's money pursuing people who jaywalk, etc. As well, the result of a successful prosecution means being sent to jail or monitored probation (at considerable taxpayer's expense) and having a criminal record, which has serious personal consequences.

Civil law (suing) is a much looser set of standards. Firstly, there is no actual legal code that has to be applied, everything is open to claims of harm, it is mostly a matter of persuasion by the claimant. Secondly, there is no burden of proof, there just has to be a probability. Thirdly, there is no punishment, there is only financial compensation at stake, and the less money an individual has, the less likely they will be sued because they have no assets to be claimed if the suit wins. And finally, the cost of the actual lawyers and trial are not paid for by government but by the individuals, and these are so extreme that most people (or their insurance companies) will settle, rather than continue the suit.

So the two aspects of 'justice' are completely separate. I would say most of the arguments being made here are potentially relevant towards Ms. Hutchins husband filing a civil lawsuit for financial compensation, rather than about anyone breaking an actual law.

JMO

Her husband has much on his side for a civil suit. If all the things that have been reported are true this is a train wreck of issues. It’s a benefit that he is a lawyer regardless of what kind. Hopefully he will be able to cut through the typical legal banter to navigate any litigation.

I can’t imagine the deep pain for he and his young son.

 

[Cool Cats]

• Alec Baldwin Breaks Silence in Tense Faceoff With Paparazzi
• She's THAT desperate for attention!' Hilaria Baldwin is ripped for interrupting Alec's interview | Daily Mail Online
• ‘Rust’ Assistant Director: I Didn’t Check Alec Baldwin’s Gun—but ‘Should Have’
• was a penny-pinching production rife with safety issues prior to Hutchins’ death.

“A woman died. She was my friend,” he said. “The day I arrived in Santa Fe to start shooting, I took her to dinner... We were a very, very well-oiled crew shooting a film together and then this horrible event happened.”

When a paparazzo asked about Baldwin’s meeting with Hutchins’ husband but couldn’t remember Hutchins’ name, Hilaria said, “If you’re spending this much time waiting for us, you should know her name.”

Over the objections of his wife, Baldwin said he’d met with Hutchins’ son and husband, who he described as “overwhelmed with grief.”

Baldwin talks to the media on the road side in Vermont. The couple asked the group to stop tailing them, saying their children were in the car crying.

“There are incidental accidents that happen on film sets from time to time,” Baldwin said. “But nothing like this. This is a one-in-a-trillion episode.”

Baldwin also voiced his support for efforts to restrict the use of real firearms on film and TV sets, though he noted that most of the real bullets fired on those sets throughout history happened without incident. He would not rule out working on a set with real weapons.

He admitted, however, that he wasn’t the best person to make those industry-wide calls.

“I’m not an expert in this field, so whatever other people decide is the best way to go in terms of protecting people’s safety on film sets, I’m all in favor of and I will cooperate with that in any way I can.”

Hilaria later told the Post that when she learned about the shooting, she drove to Vermont to get the family out of the spotlight.

“He needs space for me to take care of him and his mental health,” she said. “It’s an awful thing that happened. Alec feels awful.”

She said she was worried about PTSD.
“You look at what happens to soldiers and police officers when something like this happens, it’s traumatic. We just came up here for quiet,” she said.

 

[Deleted member 158085]

Alec Baldwin pointing the gun at the victims was a huge misstep IMO. If he really wanted to point the gun at the camera he should have insisted on using a remote camera. JMO. This is from a link gitana1 provided.

“We’ve all seen the very famous shots in films where you get that dramatic effect of a gun being pointed at you, the audience, and of course, it’s being pointed towards the camera,” “To minimize that, one would put a remote camera in that place,

EXPLAINER: Guns on movie sets: How does that work?

You mean if he was really directed, not "wanted". And he was not in charge of safety on the set. I'm betting he did exactly as he was directed to do. He also apparently followed the protocols that were on this set.

 

[Deleted member 158085]

His pulling a trigger during rehearsal would be odd - since no point in having the bang of a blank during rehearsal - especially with a child on set (the young actor playing the grandson was a couple of feet from Baldwin).

Actors are never supposed to aim directly at people, so I do believe it was a misstep - but Baldwin had every reason to believe it was a cold gun (no blanks OR bullets). Guns with blanks are still "hot guns" ever since Brandon Lee died.

If they didn't want him to pull the trigger, why bother loading it with anything at all?

 

[Luna20]

Here is the article describing latest developments.
The day Alec Baldwin shot Halyna Hutchins and Joel Souza (yahoo.com)

Wow this article is more detailed than the one from @Mo Thuairim that I commented on earlier today #182. What’s missing from these still is any word from Sarah the prop master. No doubt she is listening to her attorney. I’m curious if she and HGR accounting of events will overlap.

 

[Deleted member 39678]

You mean if he was really directed, not "wanted". And he was not in charge of safety on the set. I'm betting he did exactly as he was directed to do. He also apparently followed the protocols that were on this set.

It appears that Alec Baldwin was not directed to point the gun at the camera. He was showing the director what he was going to do when filming started.

“So,” he had said, placing his hand on the Colt .45 revolver in its holster, “I guess I’m gonna take this out, pull it, and go, ‘Bang!’”

No projectile was supposed to be in the firearm. Just a dummy round that contained no gunpowder. Baldwin was simply showing the director and the cinematographer of “Rust,” a low-budget indie western film, what he was going to do when cameras began rolling.

The day Alec Baldwin shot Halyna Hutchins and Joel Souza

 

[steeltowngirl]

Here is the article describing latest developments.
The day Alec Baldwin shot Halyna Hutchins and Joel Souza (yahoo.com)

Good article. What’s this about alcohol on the set? I assume that’s typical on movie sets, but safety on this set is certainly being called into question:

Producers officially announced their decision “to wrap the set at least until the investigations are complete” in an email to crew members on Sunday night.

They were quietly trying to wrap production as the investigation unfolded. There was travel to book, rental equipment to return and a seemingly endless tally of things to be scanned, shipped or donated.

To-do lists were written and shared in Slack, where Pickle, the line producer, chimed in: “Any remaining alcohol donated to row and gabby!” Someone responded with a thumbs up emoji.

 

[Deleted member 39678]

If they didn't want him to pull the trigger, why bother loading it with anything at all?

If Alec Baldwin had been rehearsing using the rubber revolver that we know was on set he could have pulled on the trigger all he wanted and no one would have died or been injured.

While this rehearsing was going on more care could have been taken checking the safety of the real gun for when filming started. Instead things were rushed, ending with a women being killed. JMO.

Bags with ammunition, cardboard boxes of ammunition along with a replica rubber revolver and other items were also recovered during the search.

'Rust' movie shooting: Deputies confiscate more weapons, ammunition from set

 

[Deleted member 158085]

Here is the article describing latest developments.
The day Alec Baldwin shot Halyna Hutchins and Joel Souza (yahoo.com)

From your link:

“Alec was pretty concerned about safety on set,” said another camera technician.

“He wanted to know where I would be standing when he drew his gun,” this person said. “I told him I was going to be standing in a different place, and he said, ‘Good.’”