Alec Baldwin: on-set 'Rust' shooting - NEW UPDATE

[Mark W.]

That's a nice chapter you wrote there but he still shot someone. Also note that I said I wouldn't have pointed a gun at someone before I had any training. Most of us know better or there would be way more accidents.

Baldwin's FATHER was for 28 years a paid school rifle shooting instructor when Alex was growing up. Not knowing anything about firearms is not part of his involvement.

 

[billdeserthills]

Just heard that myself. Yawn. What is wrong with our legal/ judicial system? He was negligent, 3 years ago? Indict, try and punish! So we don't need to keep hearing about it.

Seems like it should be a case of 'double jeopardy', by now...

Grand Jury Indicts Alec Baldwin In Fatal Shooting Of 'Rust' Movie Cinematographer

Special prosecutors brought the case before a grand jury in Santa Fe this week, months after receiving a new analysis of the gun that was used.

www.huffpost.com

 

[clanhanson]

Here's what happened (without bias against Baldwin or conspiracy theories):

After Gutierrez-Reed loaded the gun with live ammo, it was delivered on set to AD David Halls. His job was to check the pistol, confirm it was safe to use in the scene, and then hand it over to Baldwin. Upon receipt of the pistol, Halls declared the gun safe (calling out "cold gun" on the set) without actually confirming that it was safe to use. Halls has since pleaded guilty to unsafe handling of a firearm and was sentenced to six months probation, a $500 fine and ordered to take a safety class.

Baldwin was handed a firearm by an AD tasked with weapon safety, who explicitly told him it was safe, and then killed Hutchins with the unsafe gun. It's a ridiculous notion that the negligence is Baldwin's, as these multiple layers of security exist entirely to remove that burden/risk from the actors who are required to handle weapons on camera.

 

[VinnieBoomBah]

Here's what happened (without bias against Baldwin or conspiracy theories):

After Gutierrez-Reed loaded the gun with live ammo, it was delivered on set to AD David Halls. His job was to check the pistol, confirm it was safe to use in the scene, and then hand it over to Baldwin. Upon receipt of the pistol, Halls declared the gun safe (calling out "cold gun" on the set) without actually confirming that it was safe to use. Halls has since pleaded guilty to unsafe handling of a firearm and was sentenced to six months probation, a $500 fine and ordered to take a safety class.

Baldwin was handed a firearm by an AD tasked with weapon safety, who explicitly told him it was safe, and then killed Hutchins with the unsafe gun. It's a ridiculous notion that the negligence is Baldwin's, as these multiple layers of security exist entirely to remove that burden/risk from the actors who are required to handle weapons on camera.

I mean, sure. But how does that address my upset over Baldwins hypocrisy?



/s

 

[lucusloc]

Here's what happened (without bias against Baldwin or conspiracy theories):

After Gutierrez-Reed loaded the gun with live ammo, it was delivered on set to AD David Halls. His job was to check the pistol, confirm it was safe to use in the scene, and then hand it over to Baldwin. Upon receipt of the pistol, Halls declared the gun safe (calling out "cold gun" on the set) without actually confirming that it was safe to use. Halls has since pleaded guilty to unsafe handling of a firearm and was sentenced to six months probation, a $500 fine and ordered to take a safety class.

Baldwin was handed a firearm by an AD tasked with weapon safety, who explicitly told him it was safe, and then killed Hutchins with the unsafe gun. It's a ridiculous notion that the negligence is Baldwin's, as these multiple layers of security exist entirely to remove that burden/risk from the actors who are required to handle weapons on camera.

Right, but that was Baldwin as the actor. Baldwin as the producer held ultimate responsibility for set safety, as he was top man on the totem pole. He delegated that responsibility to people who were either incompetent, negligent or both. That may not mean he holds 100% culpability (especially in cases of negligence) but it does mean he holds ultimate culpability for the state of safety on the set.

And that safety standard was abysmal, with multiple red flag incidents happening before the fatal shooting, a near walk-off strike over set conditions and a producer (Baldwin himself) who bullied his way though all concerns and swept them under the rug to keep production moving.

All this means Baldwin holds a very high degree of culpability in this, it's just that that culpability comes from his role in leadership, not as his role as the stupid scrub who pulled the trigger on a "safe" gun. Honestly I think the prosecution also has the wrong focus here, as if they focused on Baldwins already documented record of safety violations on this production whether or not the gun was correctly functional is a moot point, he allowed the conditions that lead to the tragedy despite multiple warnings that things needed to change.

I mean, sure. But how does that address my upset over Baldwins hypocrisy?



/s

Baldwin is an arrogant bubblegum who ignored all responsibility as a leader and set himself up to fatally shoot someone by hiring incompetent morons and not firing them the first time they failed in their duties. His own hypocrisy is indeed the core of the issue here, it's just sitting at slightly more indirect level.

 

[clanhanson]

Right, but that was Baldwin as the actor. Baldwin as the producer held ultimate responsibility for set safety, as he was top man on the totem pole. He delegated that responsibility to people who were either incompetent, negligent or both. That may not mean he holds 100% culpability (especially in cases of negligence) but it does mean he holds ultimate culpability for the state of safety on the set.

And that safety standard was abysmal, with multiple red flag incidents happening before the fatal shooting, a near walk-off strike over set conditions and a producer (Baldwin himself) who bullied his way though all concerns and swept them under the rug to keep production moving.

All this means Baldwin holds a very high degree of culpability in this, it's just that that culpability comes from his role in leadership, not as his role as the stupid scrub who pulled the trigger on a "safe" gun. Honestly I think the prosecution also has the wrong focus here, as if they focused on Baldwins already documented record of safety violations on this production whether or not the gun was correctly functional is a moot point, he allowed the conditions that lead to the tragedy despite multiple warnings that things needed to change.


Baldwin is an arrogant bubblegum who ignored all responsibility as a leader and set himself up to fatally shoot someone by hiring incompetent morons and not firing them the first time they failed in their duties. His own hypocrisy is indeed the core of the issue here, it's just sitting at slightly more indirect level.

I never said he wasn't arrogant, and involuntary manslaughter seems fair to me. The production was chaos and evidence of corner cutting is everywhere (much of which was Baldwin's doing).

I'm merely addressing those that want so badly to believe that he knowingly committed murder; he did not. Actors pulling the trigger of a firearm pointed at other actors is a common occurrence in film and is usually handled with utmost care and attention. Watch the shootout in "Heat" to see what is commonly referred to as the greatest depiction of a shootout in film... imagine the carnage if those in charge were as incompetent as those working on Rust...

 

[Bobbygun]

I mean, sure. But how does that address my upset over Baldwins hypocrisy?



/s

Exactly! And at this point I would have to ask @clanhanson - How could "without bias toward Baldwin" even be on the table? I can't stand that tool!

 

[VinnieBoomBah]

I never said he wasn't arrogant, and involuntary manslaughter seems fair to me. The production was chaos and evidence of corner cutting is everywhere (much of which was Baldwin's doing).

I'm merely addressing those that want so badly to believe that he knowingly committed murder; he did not. Actors pulling the trigger of a firearm pointed at other actors is a common occurrence in film and is usually handled with utmost care and attention. Watch the shootout in "Heat" to see what is commonly referred to as the greatest depiction of a shootout in film... imagine the carnage if those in charge were as incompetent as those working on Rust...

Made even more confusing by no one being able to tell which gun it was that fired

 

[clanhanson]

Exactly! And at this point I would have to ask @clanhanson - How could "without bias toward Baldwin" even be on the table? I can't stand that tool!

Team America is one of my favorite movies and Baldwin makes a great villain in it!



I just try to go by the old saying "justice is blind"

 

[Bobbygun]

Team America is one of my favorite movies and Baldwin makes a great villain in it!

View attachment 1805675

I just try to go by the old saying "justice is blind"

Gotta admit, I've watched The Edge way too many times, just to see Baldwin bleed.

 

[clanhanson]

Gotta admit, I've watched The Edge way too many times, just to see Baldwin bleed.

He's a talented actor with some of his older films being absolute classics (Beetlejuice, need I say more?!). Eventually he began stuffing his head slowly, but surely, up his own rectum, enjoying the emanating smells as they were far superior to those of others.

 

[lucusloc]

I never said he wasn't arrogant, and involuntary manslaughter seems fair to me. The production was chaos and evidence of corner cutting is everywhere (much of which was Baldwin's doing).

I'm merely addressing those that want so badly to believe that he knowingly committed murder; he did not. Actors pulling the trigger of a firearm pointed at other actors is a common occurrence in film and is usually handled with utmost care and attention. Watch the shootout in "Heat" to see what is commonly referred to as the greatest depiction of a shootout in film... imagine the carnage if those in charge were as incompetent as those working on Rust...

Yes, I was agreeing with you, I was just expanding on what you said at the end; "It's a ridiculous notion that the negligence is Baldwin's, as these multiple layers of security exist entirely to remove that burden/risk from the actors who are required to handle weapons on camera."

I basically said this exact thing a few times already in this thread. Baldwin as the actor actually holds very little, if any, culpability in his role as an actor. He was told the gun was safe, he believed what he was told and his bubblegumy/petty actions in that situation do not amount to homicide. It is his role as producer that should hang him for some kind of homicide, most fittingly negligent homicide (a step up from involuntary in most jurisdictions that have the distinction). He had ample warning that his set was unsafe and had already taken proactive steps to sweep that under the rug and ignore it. With the type of production he was running someone was bound to die sooner or later, it is just poetic justice that the death happened by his very hand as well as by his negligent leadership.

 

[lucusloc]

He's a talented actor with some of his older films being absolute classics (Beetlejuice, need I say more?!). Eventually he began stuffing his head slowly, but surely, up his own rectum, enjoying the emanating smells as they were far superior to those of others.

Great actors are, almost by definition, the best conmen. Their entire profession is to lie as best they can to a willing yet critical audience. When you combine that skill set with the fame and prestige that comes from millions of fans is it any wonder that extreme arrogance sets in for most people in the profession? The trend I see is the better the actor is, the worse a human being they are. It takes a truly special individual to properly mix the ability to act well (i.e. lie on command) and maintain a basic level of true humility and human decency.

 

[Nick Burkhardt]

 

[johnly]

Seems like it should be a case of 'double jeopardy', by now...

Grand Jury Indicts Alec Baldwin In Fatal Shooting Of 'Rust' Movie Cinematographer

Special prosecutors brought the case before a grand jury in Santa Fe this week, months after receiving a new analysis of the gun that was used.

www.huffpost.com

Indictment is outside the scope of the double jeopardy clause and it's application is far more limited than you might think.

 

[GrayGoose]

 

[GrayGoose]

 

[GrayGoose]

 

[gmerkt]

What I fail to comprehend is, what was live ammo even doing on a movie set with guns around? Has this ever been established? Was somebody target practicing during their down time? The answer to this question is key to determining responsibility. Jackass that he is, in my lowly opinion Baldwin has little culpability in the matter. The on-set safety checks failed too, and I think someone has already been ID'd on that point.

 

[lucusloc]

What I fail to comprehend is, what was live ammo even doing on a movie set with guns around? Has this ever been established? Was somebody target practicing during their down time? The answer to this question is key to determining responsibility. Jackass that he is, in my lowly opinion Baldwin has little culpability in the matter. The on-set safety checks failed too, and I think someone has already been ID'd on that point.

They used live rounds for some shots. This meant they kept live rounds as part of the inventory. The safety officer/crew would then take these live rounds for fun-time range shooting when production was not running, sometimes in between shoots that were using those very guns.

This whole setup was absolutely on Baldwin, as he was the producer who was ultimately in charge of set safety and the working culture present on set. He hired the "safety" people in charge of the armory, and he ignored their previous "safety incidents" that would have gotten them fired immediately in a more professionally run production. Yes, the safety crew are culpable, but the head of production (Baldwin) is also just as culpable in this instance because he knew the set was being run in an unsafe manner and deliberately and actively ignored it. Hell, he had already dealt with a near-mutiny and walk-off over set conditions, so there is absolutely no excuse that he was ignorant of all this, and yet he continued on with the status quo. He was eyes-wide-open negligent, plain and simple.