Alec Baldwin now charged with involuntary manslaughter by New Mexico authorities

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Baldwin was not the “Main Producer”.
Just stop with that. He brought in some money to back the film and that gave him a credit. That’s it.
He wasn’t responsible for hiring, or on set safety.
The end.

This is part of what will be worked out in a trial. If you're right, then he'll be acquitted.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If I was on that jury, I would not find him guilty.

You haven’t heard all the evidence. You should think - if I were in that jury I will have an open mind and decide after hearing all the facts. It doesn’t matter that he is famous. He shot and killed someone. Whether he should be held accountable remains to be seen.

He was handed a gun by the weapons handler that was not supposed to have live ammunition. By what logic is he responsible for killing Hutchins, regardless of whether he pulled the trigger? DA is trying to make a name for herself.

It's basic firearms safety. You check a gun as soon as it is handed to you. This is true in any industry or even the military. Why would the film industry get a pass on firearms safety? If they dont want to use guns safely, they shouldnt use guns.

False analogy--an actor is NOT a soldier, a gun owner, an expeditioner, a hunting guide, a firearms instructor etc. he is an actor and they pay people to check these guns before handing them to the actor.
They do not want unqualified people opening weapons, or worse, crazy actors opening them and replacing dummy ammo with live ammo.

I think the trial, if there is one, will call your beliefs about firearms procedures on film sets into doubt. Here, let George Clooney tell you:

“Every single time I’m handed a gun on the set — every time — they hand me a gun, I look at it, I open it, I show it to the person I’m pointing it too, I show it to the crew,” Clooney said. “Every single take.” Then, “You hand it back to the armor when you’re done.” He said. Part of it is because of what happened to Brandon. Everyone does it. Everyone knows” that is the protocol to follow. “Maybe Alec did that — hopefully he did do that."

https://www.google.com/amp/s/deadline.com/2021/11/george-clooney-on-rust-incident-thinks-gun-safety-1234874907/amp/

I think this is the crux of the case. I’ve heard very different things about what is the standard in the industry. I’d assume both sides will have experts, if this ever goes to trial. I said up thread and I’ll say it again that it seems like the AD got a great deal — he’s the one that took the gun when the armorer was nowhere on sight and told everyone it was unloaded. He seems more responsible to me than Baldwin. And of course whatever idiot brought love rojnds onto set and whoever failed to secure the guns and dummy rounds (which sounds like the armorer).

Even if the industry created standards that were unsafe, it wouldnt free them from criminal liability. They are still liable for crimes conducted while at work, like anyone else.

AB's claims that they were following standards will not hold up. There is extensive contemporaneous documentation of unsafe conditions on the set leading up to the killing. And, there were multiple documented instances of accidental discharges from the weapon AB used in Halyna's death.

AB himself was notified that crew were quitting due to a lack of firearms safety, before the killing.

They cut so many corners, they didnt even bother getting an insurance bokd, which is highly unusual.

FAFO. Baldwin wanted to use guns, wanted to keep a set where people drank and fired the same guns used on set, wanted to do everything on the cheap to maximize profits. Being a famous actor does not remove liability for the deadly consequences of playing fast and loose with gun dafety.

He should take a plea deal. He's screwed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Baldwin was not the “Main Producer”.
Just stop with that. He brought in some money to back the film and that gave him a credit. That’s it.
He wasn’t responsible for hiring, or on set safety.
The end.

Save it for your testimony.

+2

We're going to learn a lot

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If I was on that jury, I would not find him guilty.

You haven’t heard all the evidence. You should think - if I were in that jury I will have an open mind and decide after hearing all the facts. It doesn’t matter that he is famous. He shot and killed someone. Whether he should be held accountable remains to be seen.

He was handed a gun by the weapons handler that was not supposed to have live ammunition. By what logic is he responsible for killing Hutchins, regardless of whether he pulled the trigger? DA is trying to make a name for herself.

It's not because he held and shot the gun. It's because it was HIS set, he was also responsible for overall safety, which was lacking in a larger sense on that set and obviously was lacking in gun safety. If he had ONLY been an actor and had no other role in the production, I doubt we'd see this charge. It's because of his responsibility as the main producer for the overall safety, which apparently was lacking in many respects.

Again. One more time for the people in the back. If they were charging him in his capacity as a producer, they would have charged other producers. They did not.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Baldwin was not the “Main Producer”.
Just stop with that. He brought in some money to back the film and that gave him a credit. That’s it.
He wasn’t responsible for hiring, or on set safety.
The end.

Save it for your testimony.

+2

We're going to learn a lot

You dum dums won’t learn anything. You’ll still be coming here blubbering about how Alex Baldwin was responsible for collecting the time cards and over seeing daily Covid testing. How he picked a crappy catering company and should have done a better job negotiating the teamsters rate.
Here’s a hint: those also weren’t his jobs.

[Anonymous]

Oh, and this isnt even the first time Saint Alec Baldwin has been charged with a violent crime. https://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/alec-baldwin-due-in-court-over-parking-spot-punch-assault-case

He's toast, he's done. He has a history of violence and was warned repeatedly about gun safety issues on set. This isnt some totally out of character, unforseeable event.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Baldwin was not the “Main Producer”.
Just stop with that. He brought in some money to back the film and that gave him a credit. That’s it.
He wasn’t responsible for hiring, or on set safety.
The end.

Save it for your testimony.

+2

We're going to learn a lot

You dum dums won’t learn anything. You’ll still be coming here blubbering about how Alex Baldwin was responsible for collecting the time cards and over seeing daily Covid testing. How he picked a crappy catering company and should have done a better job negotiating the teamsters rate.
Here’s a hint: those also weren’t his jobs.

Teamsters rate? They used non union labor to cut costs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If I was on that jury, I would not find him guilty.

You haven’t heard all the evidence. You should think - if I were in that jury I will have an open mind and decide after hearing all the facts. It doesn’t matter that he is famous. He shot and killed someone. Whether he should be held accountable remains to be seen.

He was handed a gun by the weapons handler that was not supposed to have live ammunition. By what logic is he responsible for killing Hutchins, regardless of whether he pulled the trigger? DA is trying to make a name for herself.

It's not because he held and shot the gun. It's because it was HIS set, he was also responsible for overall safety, which was lacking in a larger sense on that set and obviously was lacking in gun safety. If he had ONLY been an actor and had no other role in the production, I doubt we'd see this charge. It's because of his responsibility as the main producer for the overall safety, which apparently was lacking in many respects.

Again. One more time for the people in the back. If they were charging him in his capacity as a producer, they would have charged other producers. They did not.

His role as a producer is relevant because he would have been aware about complaints of gun safety on the set. It's one more reason to argue that not checking the gun before firing it makes him criminally responsible

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Baldwin was not the “Main Producer”.
Just stop with that. He brought in some money to back the film and that gave him a credit. That’s it.
He wasn’t responsible for hiring, or on set safety.
The end.

Save it for your testimony.

+2

We're going to learn a lot

You dum dums won’t learn anything. You’ll still be coming here blubbering about how Alex Baldwin was responsible for collecting the time cards and over seeing daily Covid testing. How he picked a crappy catering company and should have done a better job negotiating the teamsters rate.
Here’s a hint: those also weren’t his jobs.

Teamsters rate? They used non union labor to cut costs.

For transpo? You sure about that?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Oh, and this isnt even the first time Saint Alec Baldwin has been charged with a violent crime. https://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/alec-baldwin-due-in-court-over-parking-spot-punch-assault-case

He's toast, he's done. He has a history of violence and was warned repeatedly about gun safety issues on set. This isnt some totally out of character, unforseeable event.

Who thinks he is a saint? No one! Doesn’t mean he should be criminally charged for someone handing him a gun and saying - according to multiple sources - cold gun.

But do please provide sourcing for your claim about the repeated warnings. Other than the usual procedures for gun safety on sets.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If I was on that jury, I would not find him guilty.

You haven’t heard all the evidence. You should think - if I were in that jury I will have an open mind and decide after hearing all the facts. It doesn’t matter that he is famous. He shot and killed someone. Whether he should be held accountable remains to be seen.

He was handed a gun by the weapons handler that was not supposed to have live ammunition. By what logic is he responsible for killing Hutchins, regardless of whether he pulled the trigger? DA is trying to make a name for herself.

It's not because he held and shot the gun. It's because it was HIS set, he was also responsible for overall safety, which was lacking in a larger sense on that set and obviously was lacking in gun safety. If he had ONLY been an actor and had no other role in the production, I doubt we'd see this charge. It's because of his responsibility as the main producer for the overall safety, which apparently was lacking in many respects.

Again. One more time for the people in the back. If they were charging him in his capacity as a producer, they would have charged other producers. They did not.

He isn't being charged as a producer but he is being charged as the guy who fired the shot that also had knowledge about safety issues on set due to his role as producer. Possibly if he was only an actor - he might not have been charged but his negligence in pulling the trigger is increased by his contextual knowledge of the various safety issues related to guns on set.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If I was on that jury, I would not find him guilty.

You haven’t heard all the evidence. You should think - if I were in that jury I will have an open mind and decide after hearing all the facts. It doesn’t matter that he is famous. He shot and killed someone. Whether he should be held accountable remains to be seen.

He was handed a gun by the weapons handler that was not supposed to have live ammunition. By what logic is he responsible for killing Hutchins, regardless of whether he pulled the trigger? DA is trying to make a name for herself.

It's not because he held and shot the gun. It's because it was HIS set, he was also responsible for overall safety, which was lacking in a larger sense on that set and obviously was lacking in gun safety. If he had ONLY been an actor and had no other role in the production, I doubt we'd see this charge. It's because of his responsibility as the main producer for the overall safety, which apparently was lacking in many respects.

Again. One more time for the people in the back. If they were charging him in his capacity as a producer, they would have charged other producers. They did not.

His role as a producer is relevant because he would have been aware about complaints of gun safety on the set. It's one more reason to argue that not checking the gun before firing it makes him criminally responsible

Oh. So why are they not publicizing the charges against KC Brandenstein, Matt DelPlano, Tyler Gould, Matthew Helderman, Matthew Hutchins, Nathan Klingher, Annul Nigam, Gabrielle Pickle, Ryan Donnell Smith, Luke Taylor and Ryan Winterstern? You know - all the other producers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If I was on that jury, I would not find him guilty.

You haven’t heard all the evidence. You should think - if I were in that jury I will have an open mind and decide after hearing all the facts. It doesn’t matter that he is famous. He shot and killed someone. Whether he should be held accountable remains to be seen.

He was handed a gun by the weapons handler that was not supposed to have live ammunition. By what logic is he responsible for killing Hutchins, regardless of whether he pulled the trigger? DA is trying to make a name for herself.

It's not because he held and shot the gun. It's because it was HIS set, he was also responsible for overall safety, which was lacking in a larger sense on that set and obviously was lacking in gun safety. If he had ONLY been an actor and had no other role in the production, I doubt we'd see this charge. It's because of his responsibility as the main producer for the overall safety, which apparently was lacking in many respects.

Again. One more time for the people in the back. If they were charging him in his capacity as a producer, they would have charged other producers. They did not.

He isn't being charged as a producer but he is being charged as the guy who fired the shot that also had knowledge about safety issues on set due to his role as producer. Possibly if he was only an actor - he might not have been charged but his negligence in pulling the trigger is increased by his contextual knowledge of the various safety issues related to guns on set.

You are just trying to make something stick and know nothing about either film production or criminal law.

[Anonymous]

Ok just reread an article.
It was absolutely a union set. They were working under an IA contract.
When some crew walked off for safety concerns they were replaced with non union workers. Those workers were still
Working under the CBA.
I would be interested to know if Baldwin was included in the emails regarding crew departure.
Also it’s ridiculous that the person who hired the armorer doesn’t face consequences. That’s the point where everything went wrong. They forced the armorer to do 2 jobs ( guns and props) At least I’m pretty sure I read that. That is where everything initially went wrong. She should have only had 1 job. The production company basically decided safety wasn’t important from the start.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Ok just reread an article.
It was absolutely a union set. They were working under an IA contract.
When some crew walked off for safety concerns they were replaced with non union workers. Those workers were still
Working under the CBA.
I would be interested to know if Baldwin was included in the emails regarding crew departure.
Also it’s ridiculous that the person who hired the armorer doesn’t face consequences. That’s the point where everything went wrong. They forced the armorer to do 2 jobs ( guns and props) At least I’m pretty sure I read that. That is where everything initially went wrong. She should have only had 1 job. The production company basically decided safety wasn’t important from the start.

The armorer's experience and qualifications seemed to amount to having a father who was a famous armorer. Call me crazy, but this doesn't seem like a learn it on the fly kind of job