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

Status
Not open for further replies.
From the link:

“In a Fox News Digital exclusive, Gutierrez Reed explained she isn’t yet ready to address the matter.

"It’s only been two weeks and I’m not ready to speak on it yet," Gutierrez Reed told Fox News Digital on Wednesday. "That’ll come," she pressed in an irritated yet somber tone, adding, "at this point in time, I’m just referring and directing everyone to my lawyers."

Meanwhile, Gutierrez Reed’s father, Thell Reed, who is a well-known Hollywood armorer, declined to speak to Fox News Digital but relayed that he "wasn’t there" and didn’t have any more to add”
 
I just thought of something else in regards to liability insurance for this production.

If the policy states that certain safety measures have to be met and it's proven that they were not met, does that mean there is no insurance coverage in this case?
Interesting idea. I recall an airplane crash where the owner/pilot had too many occupants in the plane, so insurance wouldn't touch it. Pilot had to declare bankruptcy, and family of victims got almost no compensation.

In terms of assets, normally you can't be sued for your private assets if you're in the role of owner, partner or employee of a limited liability company when the incident occurs. That's the purpose of limited liability companies.
 
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. She talked about other production companies acting as agents for the main one and well, she kind of lost me in legal speak.

All I know is that the law firm will work very hard to fight for justice for Halyna and her family and that's all I really wanted to hear.
 
I just thought of something else in regards to liability insurance for this production.

If the policy states that certain safety measures have to be met and it's proven that they were not met, does that mean there is no insurance coverage in this case?

The producers never took out a full policy, I mean the type of policy that covers costs in the event that the movie cannot be made at all, which is of course what happened here.
 
After the insurance company pays off the six million to Halyna's family and Joel Souza can the insurance company go after anyone to cover their loses?
I don't know but the project was turned down by some insurance companies and was not able to get bonded. I assume it will be even more difficult for them to buy insurance for future projects.
‘Rust’ EPs Disavow Responsibility For Troubled Alec Baldwin Movie: “No Involvement With The Physical And Day-To-Day Production”
 
Gutierrez Reed’s father, Thell Reed, who is a well-known Hollywood armorer, declined to speak to Fox News Digital but relayed that he "wasn’t there" and didn’t have any more to add.

If Thell Reed had been the armorer on the set of Rust this tragedy would never had happened IMO.

He should have had his daughter apprentice with him until she had the experience to handle being a head armorer. JMO.

‘Rust’ armorer Hannah Gutierrez Reed says she’s 'not ready' to speak but promises it will 'come'
 
She went on record with the police saying the guns were locked in the safe. The attorney offered this new spin claiming she had 2 jobs therefore she couldn’t watch the firearm loot. Makes no sense!
Why are they even talking?! Like really… are Halyna’s family supposed to hear that and decided everything is ok?!
 
Link? I’d like to read more about the coverage here. Tia!
Not my post but I have the link ready from my previous post.
This link also tells how the executive producers make money even when a project fails, or worse, is never even completed or distributed.

‘Rust’ EPs Disavow Responsibility For Troubled Alec Baldwin Movie: “No Involvement With The Physical And Day-To-Day Production”

Edited for 10% TOS

Rust was not bonded. Two of the three U.S. completion bond firms were approached about bonding the project, according to sources, but it didn’t happen. In one of the two cases, a potential financier made inquiries with one and stepped back from the film when the company declined to issue a bond.

Bonds are like super-insurance, with the bond company on the hook for costs if a film isn’t delivered in time and on budget. Productions also have traditional insurance, in Rust’s case said to be from Chubb, which declined to comment.
 
Last edited:
I don't know but the project was turned down by some insurance companies and was not able to get bonded. I assume it will be even more difficult for them to buy insurance for future projects.
‘Rust’ EPs Disavow Responsibility For Troubled Alec Baldwin Movie: “No Involvement With The Physical And Day-To-Day Production”

Alec Baldwin, is the Executive Producer of El Dorado Pictures, which produced "Rust".

Alec Baldwin - Entertainment Executive | Variety.com

With El Dorado Pictures (Sorted by Popularity Ascending) - IMDb

Alec Baldwin to Play Western Outlaw in ‘Rust,’ Heading to Cannes Digital Market – The Hollywood Reporter

Thomasville filmmakers among producers for film “Rust,” rocked by fatal shooting

Looking at the financing for films is interesting. Everyone says they are not responsible. Hmmm, then how do movies get made? And who gets the profit or tax deduction?
 
Last edited:
Most companies have a D and O (directors and officers) liability policy that protects the D and Os from personal liability. In the case of this production, even if everyone did everything right, a suit would be filed against the company. Insurance companies know that D and Os are vulnerable especially given that they have employees who may not act within the scope of the procedures set forth. Even if a company is not doing the day to day but have some responsibility their D and O liability policy will protect their personal assets and come up with settlements for those who have been aggrieved.
 
I just thought of something else in regards to liability insurance for this production.

If the policy states that certain safety measures have to be met and it's proven that they were not met, does that mean there is no insurance coverage in this case?

I just happened to have this one bookmarked.

Any film requires insurance coverage and any policy for a Western would hit upon the use of horses, other animals and firearms. The call sheet for Thursday alone mentions multiple guns, several horses and a daily snake wrangler.

An insurer would likely cover any accidental events but the company might not pay for negligence claims on a movie set, according to Julie Shapiro, law professor and director of Loyola Law School’s Entertainment and Media Law Institute.

The insurance company will do its own investigation, Shapiro said, to determine if negligence occurred. The exact wording of the policy will determine what the company would pay.

While Baldwin, the other producers, the assistant director and the armorer might be named as parties in a civil lawsuit, not all may be found to be liable — particularly if they played no role in the safety aspects of the production or only held a vanity credit. The plaintiffs would likely go after the production company’s deeper pockets.

“How much? To what extent will insurance cover it? This is a loss of life _ there is no dollar amount you can place,” Shapiro said.

Legal, Insurance, Safety Issues Swirl Around 'Rust' Movie Set Shooting
 
From the link:

“In a Fox News Digital exclusive, Gutierrez Reed explained she isn’t yet ready to address the matter.

"It’s only been two weeks and I’m not ready to speak on it yet," Gutierrez Reed told Fox News Digital on Wednesday. "That’ll come," she pressed in an irritated yet somber tone, adding, "at this point in time, I’m just referring and directing everyone to my lawyers."

Meanwhile, Gutierrez Reed’s father, Thell Reed, who is a well-known Hollywood armorer, declined to speak to Fox News Digital but relayed that he "wasn’t there" and didn’t have any more to add”

By saying nothing at all, Mr. Thell Reed has so far demonstrated the most common sense of this whole bunch.
 
When I worked for a company and was a D/O, the company had its liability insurance and the company had D and O insurance for all paid Directors/Executives and Board Members (paid and non-paid). We had 5 million on all employees and 2.5 for each Board Member. At one point, we were told were underinsured and upped it to 10 million on all in these positions. I am sure that these production companies have these policies. It is standard business practice---- especially because of fraud and actions of subordinates that can place a company in jeopardy. Every year I sat with our auditor to assure that we were adhering to proper procedure and were looking for fraudulent or improper actions--- it was something that our D/O insurer wanted to have access to or would survey us bi-annually.

We were also encouraged to purchase our own liability beyond D and O to make sure our assets were covered.

Explanation of D and O Insurance from the Hartford:

Directors and officers (D&O) liability insurance protects the personal assets of corporate directors and officers, and their spouses, in the event they are personally sued by employees, vendors, competitors, investors, customers, or other parties, for actual or alleged wrongful acts in managing a company.

The insurance, which usually protects the company as well, covers legal fees, settlements, and other costs. D&O insurance is the financial backing for a standard indemnification provision, which holds officers harmless for losses due to their role in the company. Many officers and directors will want a company to provide both indemnification and D&O insurance.

Directors and officers are sued for a variety of reasons related to their company roles, including:

Breach of fiduciary duty resulting in financial losses or bankruptcy
Misrepresentation of company assets
Misuse of company funds
Fraud
Failure to comply with workplace laws
Theft of intellectual property and poaching of competitor’s customers
Lack of corporate governance
Illegal acts or illegal profits are generally not covered under D&O insurance

https://www.thehartford.com/management-liability-insurance/d-o-liability-insurance/explained
 
And by suggesting sabotage, HGR is admitting she had eyes off of the ammo, leaving it out for someone else to mess with.


Speaking on the "Today" show Wednesday, Gutierrez Reed's attorneys, Jason Bowles and Robert Gorence, claimed that the bullets their client loaded into the gun on the day of the shooting were taken from a box that was only supposed to contain dummy rounds that were incapable of firing.

However, because the ammunition was left unattended from roughly 11 a.m. to 1 p.m. that day, they believe the opportunity was there for a disgruntled crew member to mix a live round into the box.

‘Rust’ armorer Hannah Gutierrez Reed says she’s 'not ready' to speak but promises it will 'come'
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
105
Guests online
528
Total visitors
633

Forum statistics

Threads
625,988
Messages
18,515,119
Members
240,890
Latest member
xprakruthix
Back
Top