Alec Baldwin indicted for involuntary manslaughter in fatal gunfire on film set

https://lemmy.world/post/10928093

Alec Baldwin indicted for involuntary manslaughter in fatal gunfire on film set - Lemmy.World

Grand jury in New Mexico charged the actor for a shooting on Rust set that killed cinematographer Halyna Hutchins Actor Alec Baldwin is facing a new involuntary manslaughter charge over the 2021 fatal shooting of a cinematographer on the set of the movie Rust. A Santa Fe, New Mexico, grand jury indicted Baldwin on Friday, months after prosecutors had dismissed the same criminal charge against him. During an October 2021 rehearsal on the set of Rust, a western drama, Baldwin was pointing a gun at cinematographer Halyna Hutchins when it went off, fatally striking her and wounding Joel Souza, the film’s director. Baldwin, a co-producer and star of the film, has said he did not pull the trigger, but pulled back the hammer of the gun before it fired. Last April, special prosecutors dismissed the involuntary manslaughter charge against Baldwin, saying the firearm might have been modified prior to the shooting and malfunctioned and that forensic analysis was warranted. But in August, prosecutors said they were considering re-filing the charges after a new analysis of the weapon was completed.

He hired the cheapest firearms manager, tolerated crew playing with real bullets, and so when he’s handed a loaded gun, it’s a direct result of his own mistakes.
And then tried to blame any and everyone but himself afterwards.

If he’s not lying about not pulling the trigger, then he, or the firearms manager, also bought a dangerously cheap gun.

The whole thing was a cascading failure, imho, with Baldwin at the end of it, making him no less culpable than anyone before him. Ultimately, “I didn’t know the gun was loaded” is never an excuse.

It wasn't necessarily cheap. It was just a double action revolver.
All of the downvotes are from right wingers brigading.

All that is why he is civilly liable for her wrongful death.

The reason he is criminally liable is because, without bothering to check that the weapon was safe, he elected to point it at a woman and pull the trigger.

The thing is, he's not the one who hired her.

He was one of 10 listed producers on that film, and was not the hiring director.

He’s the one who just took a gun laying nearby (without asking anyone about it being normal), jokingly pointed it at a person and squeezed the trigger.

People defending him seem to think that “criminal stupidity” is not a thing.

I would love to see a source on that story, because it sounds super made up
The first article I’ve read on the event. I don’t remember it and I won’t provide you with the source.
Are you saying that quote is where you got what you said from? Because it doesn’t say anything like what you said
Where exactly in that quote does it say he took a gun laying nearby without asking anyone about it, jokingly pointed it at a person, and squeezed the trigger? Literally none of what you said happened according to that quote. Do you wanna maybe delete the misinformation in your comments?
You’re a liar. You made it up.
I made up the quote? Go on with your life that same way, it’s gonna be amusing.
You don’t have a quote that supports what you said champ
This is not accurate. At.all. it’s really funny how much stuff gets repeated online without any evidence. Social media is just one big game of telephone
lemmy.zip/comment/6483250 - I meant this.
Alec Baldwin indicted for involuntary manslaughter in fatal gunfire on film set - Lemmy.zip

Grand jury in New Mexico charged the actor for a shooting on Rust set that killed cinematographer Halyna Hutchins Actor Alec Baldwin is facing a new involuntary manslaughter charge over the 2021 fatal shooting of a cinematographer on the set of the movie Rust. A Santa Fe, New Mexico, grand jury indicted Baldwin on Friday, months after prosecutors had dismissed the same criminal charge against him. During an October 2021 rehearsal on the set of Rust, a western drama, Baldwin was pointing a gun at cinematographer Halyna Hutchins when it went off, fatally striking her and wounding Joel Souza, the film’s director. Baldwin, a co-producer and star of the film, has said he did not pull the trigger, but pulled back the hammer of the gun before it fired. Last April, special prosecutors dismissed the involuntary manslaughter charge against Baldwin, saying the firearm might have been modified prior to the shooting and malfunctioned and that forensic analysis was warranted. But in August, prosecutors said they were considering re-filing the charges after a new analysis of the weapon was completed.

You are contradicting your own comment.
Put some detail to explain your position, saying that alone is worth nothing.
Thats not what happened at all. He was handed a gun and told it was safe.

Um no. That's a blatant lie.

He was handed a gun, and told it was cold.

According to a search warrant, the guns were briefly checked by armorer Gutierrez-Reed, before assistant director Halls took the Pietta revolver from the prop cart and handed it to Baldwin.[38][39] In a subsequent affidavit, Halls said the safety protocol regarding this firearm was such that Halls would open the loading gate of the revolver and rotate the cylinder to expose the chambers so he could inspect them himself. According to the affidavit, Halls said he did not check all cylinder chambers, but he recalled seeing three rounds in the cylinder at the time. (After the shooting, Halls said in the affidavit, Gutierrez-Reed retrieved the weapon and opened it, and Halls said that he saw four rounds which were plainly blanks, and one which could have been the remaining shell of a discharged live round.)[40] In the warrant, it is further stated that Halls announced the term "cold gun", meaning that it was empty.[38] Halls's lawyer, Lisa Torraco, later sought to assert that he did not take the gun off the cart and hand it to Baldwin as reported, but when pressed by a reporter to be clear, she refused to repeat that assertion.[41]

People attacking him just make shit up left and right.

Maybe we do, it’s confusing that when somebody points a gun at another person which he hasn’t personally checked and pretends that somebody had to check it instead of him and that absolves him, some people think he’s right.

So, you admit you're just making shit up to paint Baldwin in a worse light?

You also admit you have no fucking clue how stage and film work?

Because pointing a gun at someone for a film is allowed, because the production hires actual experts who are legally responsible for making sure that any weapon handed to an actor is safe. The armorer in this case was incompetent, and got the job because her father was a damn fine armorer and had connections.

Do note, that while Baldwin was a producer on the film, he was one of 10 producers, and never handled hiring. His main duties were fundraising and minor script changes.

I started with recalling that the accident happened when he was waving the gun for expressiveness. Then my memory went off track, like it often happens, because the general idea of somebody using a real weapon for expressiveness for me is very irresponsible.

That core part turns out to still be correct. The rest not.

Also you are making it sound as if having a real shooting gun on a set at all was so bloody necessary and unavoidable that it doesn’t make sense to teach people holding it basic rules.

waving the gun for expressiveness

See, that's the first place your memory was wrong. Because that core part is in fact wrong.

He was rehearsing a scene with the director. Asking questions about where to stand and how to draw and aim the gun.

The real gun on set was because it would usually be loaded with blanks.

Period accurate guns didn't have smokeless powder. So the blanks would be loaded with that same powder.

You also want a real gun for closeup work. There was not supposed to be any live ammo on set, so it should have been safe.

Unfortunately, the armorer was incompetent, and the prop supplier sent dummy rounds that had been co-mingled with live rounds that were produced for a previous film.

OK, makes sense. I’ve been a bit stubborn on this because of the way Americans talk to everyone they suspect of sympathies to the other half of their internal politics.

You've also been spreading lies and misinformation up and down this thread.

Here, read this.

https://variety.com/2021/film/news/rust-investigators-live-rounds-alec-baldwin-1235122384/

It's how live rounds made it onto that set in the first place. Until Baldwin pulled that trigger, no one on set had known that there were any live rounds on set.

'Rust' Investigators Reveal New Details About Source of Live Rounds

New Mexico investigators revealed new details about the potential source of live rounds on the set of "Rust."

Variety
Do you know his involvement in her being hired? Being a producer can mean anything from total involvement to it just being a name on paper.
That’s the problem with being awarded a title regardless if you’re fulfilling the duty. It happens way too much in movies. ‘Executive producer’ has been a widely known catch-all fallacy title and if this means people start thinking about responsibility and culpability and not just their ego to go with titles I’m all for it.
I’m like 90% sure now that the absolutely glacial pace this is moving at confirms that the only reason verdicts come down so quickly in most other cases is because most accused can’t afford the court and lawyer’s fees to keep fighting for as long as they realistically could.
Except if your name is Trump. Somehow he’s able to drag out all his court cases and not pay his lawyers.
Thats because he has people pretending to be lawyers instead of real lawyers
Also being a lawyer for a famous person is a great way to pivot into more lucrative life paths, as demonstrated by Robert Kardashian.
That I chalk more up to how pants shittingly terrified judges are of setting a new precedent, let alone one as impactful as jailing a former president. None of them want to be the guy who goes down in history as having locked up a major political figure without the most air tight case imaginable.
This is the most airtight case imaginable.
He also has just straight-up admitted to other big crimes on camera as well.
Yo fuck it. Make me an honorary reader of the judicial order to send Trump to prison. I’ll do it on National television. Just haul my ass to Australia or something afterwards so I can avoid the crazed MAGA mobs.

I've said it once and I'll say it again, if you're holding a weapon it is your responsibility to know if that weapon is live, I don't care who hands it to you or under what context. Children learn this in rifle safety.

Does the armorer share responsibility? Definitely. But you can't just say "someone else got hired to do that so Baldwin is off the hook." Even pointing a gun around, live ammo or not, with the hammer cocked is plainly asinine and unsafe behavior. All Baldwin needed to do was take 5 seconds to open the chamber and look at the bullets to prevent someone losing their life, if that's not negligence then what exactly is?

I’d flip the share of liability, personally. The primary liable party is the armorer since it’s their actual job to handle these things. But Baldwin shares in liability IMO because of the negligence of not verifying the state of the firearm. Especially after he knew others had used it for firing real rounds.

The whole thing is just sloppy as hell and highlights to me why regulations need to be in place, or movies need to let go of the gun firing bullshit. Every god damned thing is done in CG now, they can’t afford muzzle flash suddenly?

Yeah I do agree it is primarily her fault (though why she was hired in the first place is a whole other thing, I suspect Baldwin had little to do with that anyway though). I just think he needs to take his part of the blame and not just be let off because he's a celebrity boy.
As both the one holding the gun and the one who had a say in hiring the armorer Baldwin absolutely deserves the majority of the blame.
Why would you point a gun, prop or otherwise, blanks or otherwise, at the cinematographer when cameras aren’t rolling?

Who the hell knows. He claims he was rehearsing the scene, which seems plausible. The scene being filmed would have resulted in the same injury and death, so cameras rolling doesn’t seem to be an important aspect.

A better questions would be why TF the industry as a whole allows people in the path of the barrel, why they insist on using firearms with blanks, and why acting staff aren’t given training on any weapon they will handle so they know how to properly inspect them.

it's called a camera test.

Baldwin, the cinematographer and the director were all working through blocking (the movements needed for when the camera would be actually rolling).

The camera was in position, and the cinematographer and director were both looking through the monitors to adjust lighting and such.

This is all very standard stuff, and if one of the dummy rounds hadn't actually been a reload of live ammo, it would have remained standard.

This talks about how the live ammo made it onto the set.

https://variety.com/2021/film/news/rust-investigators-live-rounds-alec-baldwin-1235122384/

Baldwin could have looked at the logos on the bullets, seen the Starline Brass, and assumed that they were all dummy rounds. Only 5 of the 6 were.

'Rust' Investigators Reveal New Details About Source of Live Rounds

New Mexico investigators revealed new details about the potential source of live rounds on the set of "Rust."

Variety
Core military leadership lesson: you can delegate authority, but it is impossible to delegate responsibility.
So if a stuntman dies on set the producer should be prosecuted because they hired the stunt coordinator?

This is not my area of expertise, but I’d guess that there is a difference between responsibility and criminal responsibility.

The producer could probably be sued in civil court.

I’ve said it once and I’ll say it again, the rules of firearm safety apply in common situations, not on professional movie sets. I’m reminded of a video of a parked car causing a massive pile up in a bicycle race, because even though it wasn’t moving, the people in the middle of the pack can’t see past the cyclists in front of them, and can’t dodge the car in time. That post got comment after comment about how stupid the cyclists were, how you should always be prepared to stop at a moment’s notice, how you should never cycle anywhere without at least six miles of visibility, but the thing is, in bicycle races, common sense doesn’t apply. The roads are supposed to be clear because cyclists aren’t going to be able to see far enough ahead of them to properly react to obstacles, because that’s what bicycle races are like.

Similarly, when you’re at your friend’s house and he’s showing off his new carbine, you absolutely treat it like they’re a moron who left it chambered, and even after you make sure it’s clear, you don’t put your finger on the trigger and you don’t point it at anyone. This isn’t because it might still shoot, it’s because you need to practice that muscle memory in case your idiot friend doesn’t clear it next time. But when you’re on a movie set, the norm switches. You’re working with professionals, and when they tell you it’s cold, it’s supposed to be safe to assume that it is in fact cold. A million other actors have made that assumption a million times each, and it’s been a safe assumption virtually every time. The people at fault when the gun isn’t cold aren’t the actors who trusted the professionals, it’s the professionals who brought live ammo to a movie set.

I’m tired of hearing about this. Start the fucking trial already.
I come to this website to take a shit
This was homicide IMO, on the part of whichever dipshit brought live rounds onto the set Baldwin should still get manslaughter for pointing a gun at someone
If simply pointing a gun at someone, even on a movie set, is manslaughter then we are in trouble.

He didn’t just point though. If he just pointed nobody would be dead.

He pointed and pulled the trigger.

The comment I replied to didn’t make that distinction.
Yes. Accidentally killing someone is manslaughter. That is what that crime means.
But not just pointing…
Trump should be hanged for teason.
Is there a reason they had a gun loaded with actual bullets or even actual bullets on the set? Isn’t like everything in movies done with blanks?
It’s US, live bullets are just everywhere, real guns are everywhere (in Europe prop guns use different caliber, you can’t use them with live ammo). Movie sets are no exception.