Alec Baldwin now charged with involuntary manslaughter by New Mexico authorities

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The other producers didn’t shoot the gun.

Ultimately many peoples mistakes ultimately added together to kill this poor person but I think they narrowed on the right people in order to achieve some justice through the law: the Armorer who was in charge of weapons, the 2nd AD who incorrectly declared “ cold gun” and the Lead Actor/producer who pulled the trigger.

It wasn't his decision to point the gun at the camera. The director told him to do that. Perhaps what is needed is for the director to have the actor check the gun before pointing it at anyone.

"He told me to do it" is not a valid defense

In this context, it is.

If it’s not a defense to war crime, it’s not a defense here.

If the order is legal at face value, then it is.

Regardless, this isn’t a war crime- it’s a question of negligence. Was he negligent under the circumstances? Given the large numbers of actors who will say they wouldn’t have checked the chamber, that’s going to be a very hard case to make.

I agree. All the actors will weigh heavily on the argument that no busy actor can act and check various other things at the same time, including a gun. It's not their responsibility - now are they all checking the guns handed to them right now? You bet they are, but they don't want to be legally responsible for that task. There is no way Baldwin ends up with anything except a slap on the wrist. The armorer, on the other hand... IT IS LITERALLY HER JOB DESCRIPTION! Jail for her.

Dp- someone hired her. Someone combined firearms with props.
Some knew that experienced armorers weren’t taking this job.
Who was that? Who was making those decisions?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The other producers didn’t shoot the gun.

Ultimately many peoples mistakes ultimately added together to kill this poor person but I think they narrowed on the right people in order to achieve some justice through the law: the Armorer who was in charge of weapons, the 2nd AD who incorrectly declared “ cold gun” and the Lead Actor/producer who pulled the trigger.

It wasn't his decision to point the gun at the camera. The director told him to do that. Perhaps what is needed is for the director to have the actor check the gun before pointing it at anyone.

"He told me to do it" is not a valid defense

In this context, it is.

If it’s not a defense to war crime, it’s not a defense here.

If the order is legal at face value, then it is.

Regardless, this isn’t a war crime- it’s a question of negligence. Was he negligent under the circumstances? Given the large numbers of actors who will say they wouldn’t have checked the chamber, that’s going to be a very hard case to make.

My understanding is that the prosecution isnt making a case of negligence.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The other producers didn’t shoot the gun.

Ultimately many peoples mistakes ultimately added together to kill this poor person but I think they narrowed on the right people in order to achieve some justice through the law: the Armorer who was in charge of weapons, the 2nd AD who incorrectly declared “ cold gun” and the Lead Actor/producer who pulled the trigger.

It wasn't his decision to point the gun at the camera. The director told him to do that. Perhaps what is needed is for the director to have the actor check the gun before pointing it at anyone.

"He told me to do it" is not a valid defense

In this context, it is.

If it’s not a defense to war crime, it’s not a defense here.

If the order is legal at face value, then it is.

Regardless, this isn’t a war crime- it’s a question of negligence. Was he negligent under the circumstances? Given the large numbers of actors who will say they wouldn’t have checked the chamber, that’s going to be a very hard case to make.

My understanding is that the prosecution isnt making a case of negligence.

They’re going to have a hard time with an involuntary manslaughter charge then.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The other producers didn’t shoot the gun.

Ultimately many peoples mistakes ultimately added together to kill this poor person but I think they narrowed on the right people in order to achieve some justice through the law: the Armorer who was in charge of weapons, the 2nd AD who incorrectly declared “ cold gun” and the Lead Actor/producer who pulled the trigger.

It wasn't his decision to point the gun at the camera. The director told him to do that. Perhaps what is needed is for the director to have the actor check the gun before pointing it at anyone.

"He told me to do it" is not a valid defense

In this context, it is.

If it’s not a defense to war crime, it’s not a defense here.

If the order is legal at face value, then it is.

Regardless, this isn’t a war crime- it’s a question of negligence. Was he negligent under the circumstances? Given the large numbers of actors who will say they wouldn’t have checked the chamber, that’s going to be a very hard case to make.

I agree. All the actors will weigh heavily on the argument that no busy actor can act and check various other things at the same time, including a gun. It's not their responsibility - now are they all checking the guns handed to them right now? You bet they are, but they don't want to be legally responsible for that task. There is no way Baldwin ends up with anything except a slap on the wrist. The armorer, on the other hand... IT IS LITERALLY HER JOB DESCRIPTION! Jail for her.

Dp- someone hired her. Someone combined firearms with props.
Some knew that experienced armorers weren’t taking this job.
Who was that? Who was making those decisions?

Something odd about the hiring choice... they were trying to save $ so they gave Hannah, the armorer, two jobs. She has since said that she was so busy it was hard to focus on gun safety.

Yet, they hired ANOTHER person with the job title "armorer mentor," who supplied all the guns and ammo, and who also suggested Hannah for the armorer position. It's not clear he was ever on set.
https://nypost.com/2021/11/09/rust-armorers-mentor-supplied-alec-baldwins-colt-45-report/

And it seems that people were walking around with live ammo. According to Vanity Fair, there were several live rounds.

I have to wonder if some sicko knew that the cast and crew were engaged in unsafe weapons practices and decided to do something awful. The guy that plays the enemy of Alec's character also had a live round and a weapon.

https://www.vanityfair.com/hollywood/2023/01/alec-baldwin-halyna-hutchins-rust-bullets

None of this lets Alec off the hook for firing a weapon at a person, but I do wonder if a much worse crime occurred but they cant prove it. That may explain the very lengthy investigation in spite of Alec's criminal culpability being pretty obvious from the start.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The other producers didn’t shoot the gun.

Ultimately many peoples mistakes ultimately added together to kill this poor person but I think they narrowed on the right people in order to achieve some justice through the law: the Armorer who was in charge of weapons, the 2nd AD who incorrectly declared “ cold gun” and the Lead Actor/producer who pulled the trigger.

It wasn't his decision to point the gun at the camera. The director told him to do that. Perhaps what is needed is for the director to have the actor check the gun before pointing it at anyone.

"He told me to do it" is not a valid defense

In this context, it is.

If it’s not a defense to war crime, it’s not a defense here.

If the order is legal at face value, then it is.

Regardless, this isn’t a war crime- it’s a question of negligence. Was he negligent under the circumstances? Given the large numbers of actors who will say they wouldn’t have checked the chamber, that’s going to be a very hard case to make.

I agree. All the actors will weigh heavily on the argument that no busy actor can act and check various other things at the same time, including a gun. It's not their responsibility - now are they all checking the guns handed to them right now? You bet they are, but they don't want to be legally responsible for that task. There is no way Baldwin ends up with anything except a slap on the wrist. The armorer, on the other hand... IT IS LITERALLY HER JOB DESCRIPTION! Jail for her.

Dp- someone hired her. Someone combined firearms with props.
Some knew that experienced armorers weren’t taking this job.
Who was that? Who was making those decisions?

Something odd about the hiring choice... they were trying to save $ so they gave Hannah, the armorer, two jobs. She has since said that she was so busy it was hard to focus on gun safety.

Yet, they hired ANOTHER person with the job title "armorer mentor," who supplied all the guns and ammo, and who also suggested Hannah for the armorer position. It's not clear he was ever on set.
https://nypost.com/2021/11/09/rust-armorers-mentor-supplied-alec-baldwins-colt-45-report/

And it seems that people were walking around with live ammo. According to Vanity Fair, there were several live rounds.

I have to wonder if some sicko knew that the cast and crew were engaged in unsafe weapons practices and decided to do something awful. The guy that plays the enemy of Alec's character also had a live round and a weapon.

https://www.vanityfair.com/hollywood/2023/01/alec-baldwin-halyna-hutchins-rust-bullets

None of this lets Alec off the hook for firing a weapon at a person, but I do wonder if a much worse crime occurred but they cant prove it. That may explain the very lengthy investigation in spite of Alec's criminal culpability being pretty obvious from the start.

"Alec's criminal culpability" is not obvious at all. That's why the sheriff had already previously said that he wouldn't be charged. Your convoluted conspiracy theory doesn't provide the explanation for the "lengthy" investigation.

The DA is reaching with this one. Playing games when it's inappropriate to do so.

[Anonymous]

If Alec was black, he'd have been in jail immediately

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I spent that same summer on a huge movie set. We had a very preventable accident on set. It’s not just Rust. Things have been spiraling for a while now. I had hoped the break for Covid would help, but it made things so much worse.

On a real job site in the blue collar world, safety is everyone's responsibility. If you see something unsafe, you are responsible to report it. You don't have the excuse of "safety is not my job." There's no, "It was his job to make sure we are safe." At least some of the workers understood this and refused to continue working on a dangerous set.

https://www.safeopedia.com/health-and-safety-in-the-workplace-is-everyones-responsibility/2/6045

Yeah. Ummm…. Movies are “real job sites” we are paid real money to do a real job.
You don’t understand the culture of that particular job, and that’s ok.

It's a culture of finger pointing when something goes wrong. I understand that. Doesn't seem very mature.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If Alec was black, he'd have been in jail immediately

Sure...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The person who is responsible, should always be held responsible. It does not matter who it is, that it is Alex Baldwin. Too many people are invested in what they think of Baldwin himself.

No sweetie. AB is a nobody. The film industry is happy to see him take the fall. Producers don’t want to change.

Insurance companies will require adherence to firearms safety, like all people handling weapons checking the chamber.

If it’s criminal, they have an out. They’re probably rooting for the DA harder than anyone

That means nothing for civil liability. Don’t you remember OJ?

You can’t insure against a criminal act

Even negligence?

[Anonymous]

Gun culture on a set seems to go against that of the rest of the country and the world.

Having a third party responsible for safety creates a huge gap in the net where things can slip though as this case demonstrated. The person operating the gun should be the final stage of accountability.

Elsewhere even children taking shooting lessons on a range are told to never point a gun at another person.

If actors don’t like that then the unions should lobby the state governments to just ban live firearms on set so they never need to be in that position.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The other producers didn’t shoot the gun.

Ultimately many peoples mistakes ultimately added together to kill this poor person but I think they narrowed on the right people in order to achieve some justice through the law: the Armorer who was in charge of weapons, the 2nd AD who incorrectly declared “ cold gun” and the Lead Actor/producer who pulled the trigger.

It wasn't his decision to point the gun at the camera. The director told him to do that. Perhaps what is needed is for the director to have the actor check the gun before pointing it at anyone.

"He told me to do it" is not a valid defense

In this context, it is.

If it’s not a defense to war crime, it’s not a defense here.

If the order is legal at face value, then it is.

Regardless, this isn’t a war crime- it’s a question of negligence. Was he negligent under the circumstances? Given the large numbers of actors who will say they wouldn’t have checked the chamber, that’s going to be a very hard case to make.

I agree. All the actors will weigh heavily on the argument that no busy actor can act and check various other things at the same time, including a gun. It's not their responsibility - now are they all checking the guns handed to them right now? You bet they are, but they don't want to be legally responsible for that task. There is no way Baldwin ends up with anything except a slap on the wrist. The armorer, on the other hand... IT IS LITERALLY HER JOB DESCRIPTION! Jail for her.

Dp- someone hired her. Someone combined firearms with props.
Some knew that experienced armorers weren’t taking this job.
Who was that? Who was making those decisions?

Something odd about the hiring choice... they were trying to save $ so they gave Hannah, the armorer, two jobs. She has since said that she was so busy it was hard to focus on gun safety.

Yet, they hired ANOTHER person with the job title "armorer mentor," who supplied all the guns and ammo, and who also suggested Hannah for the armorer position. It's not clear he was ever on set.
https://nypost.com/2021/11/09/rust-armorers-mentor-supplied-alec-baldwins-colt-45-report/

And it seems that people were walking around with live ammo. According to Vanity Fair, there were several live rounds.

I have to wonder if some sicko knew that the cast and crew were engaged in unsafe weapons practices and decided to do something awful. The guy that plays the enemy of Alec's character also had a live round and a weapon.

https://www.vanityfair.com/hollywood/2023/01/alec-baldwin-halyna-hutchins-rust-bullets

None of this lets Alec off the hook for firing a weapon at a person, but I do wonder if a much worse crime occurred but they cant prove it. That may explain the very lengthy investigation in spite of Alec's criminal culpability being pretty obvious from the start.

"Alec's criminal culpability" is not obvious at all. That's why the sheriff had already previously said that he wouldn't be charged. Your convoluted conspiracy theory doesn't provide the explanation for the "lengthy" investigation.

The DA is reaching with this one. Playing games when it's inappropriate to do so.

It's not a convoluted conspiracy theory to wonder if the live rounds were intentionally placed on set. Lots of people, including Alec, have wondered that. In fact, it would be really odd not to investigate how and why the live rounds were there.

It's not "playing games" to charge people for killing someone. And for lying-- Alec claimed he never even touched the trigger--- he is lucky they didnt charge him with obstruction.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The other producers didn’t shoot the gun.

Ultimately many peoples mistakes ultimately added together to kill this poor person but I think they narrowed on the right people in order to achieve some justice through the law: the Armorer who was in charge of weapons, the 2nd AD who incorrectly declared “ cold gun” and the Lead Actor/producer who pulled the trigger.

It wasn't his decision to point the gun at the camera. The director told him to do that. Perhaps what is needed is for the director to have the actor check the gun before pointing it at anyone.

"He told me to do it" is not a valid defense

In this context, it is.

If it’s not a defense to war crime, it’s not a defense here.

If the order is legal at face value, then it is.

Regardless, this isn’t a war crime- it’s a question of negligence. Was he negligent under the circumstances? Given the large numbers of actors who will say they wouldn’t have checked the chamber, that’s going to be a very hard case to make.

I agree. All the actors will weigh heavily on the argument that no busy actor can act and check various other things at the same time, including a gun. It's not their responsibility - now are they all checking the guns handed to them right now? You bet they are, but they don't want to be legally responsible for that task. There is no way Baldwin ends up with anything except a slap on the wrist. The armorer, on the other hand... IT IS LITERALLY HER JOB DESCRIPTION! Jail for her.

Dp- someone hired her. Someone combined firearms with props.
Some knew that experienced armorers weren’t taking this job.
Who was that? Who was making those decisions?

Something odd about the hiring choice... they were trying to save $ so they gave Hannah, the armorer, two jobs. She has since said that she was so busy it was hard to focus on gun safety.

Yet, they hired ANOTHER person with the job title "armorer mentor," who supplied all the guns and ammo, and who also suggested Hannah for the armorer position. It's not clear he was ever on set.
https://nypost.com/2021/11/09/rust-armorers-mentor-supplied-alec-baldwins-colt-45-report/

And it seems that people were walking around with live ammo. According to Vanity Fair, there were several live rounds.

I have to wonder if some sicko knew that the cast and crew were engaged in unsafe weapons practices and decided to do something awful. The guy that plays the enemy of Alec's character also had a live round and a weapon.

https://www.vanityfair.com/hollywood/2023/01/alec-baldwin-halyna-hutchins-rust-bullets

None of this lets Alec off the hook for firing a weapon at a person, but I do wonder if a much worse crime occurred but they cant prove it. That may explain the very lengthy investigation in spite of Alec's criminal culpability being pretty obvious from the start.

"Alec's criminal culpability" is not obvious at all. That's why the sheriff had already previously said that he wouldn't be charged. Your convoluted conspiracy theory doesn't provide the explanation for the "lengthy" investigation.

The DA is reaching with this one. Playing games when it's inappropriate to do so.

It's not a convoluted conspiracy theory to wonder if the live rounds were intentionally placed on set. Lots of people, including Alec, have wondered that. In fact, it would be really odd not to investigate how and why the live rounds were there.

It's not "playing games" to charge people for killing someone. And for lying-- Alec claimed he never even touched the trigger--- he is lucky they didnt charge him with obstruction.

You don't charge someone over a bad outcome. You charge them over a bad act. The prosecution is alleging negligence, but everything we've heard so far suggests Baldwin's actions were consistent with the typical behavior and expectations of actors on set.

[Anonymous]

George Clooneys assertion that he always checks his own gun goes against the notion that it’s typical and expected to always defer to the Armorer. The DA was confident that she was told from enough actors who also check their own gun that actors
“ don’t get a pass just because they are actors”.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
George Clooneys assertion that he always checks his own gun goes against the notion that it’s typical and expected to always defer to the Armorer. The DA was confident that she was told from enough actors who also check their own gun that actors
“ don’t get a pass just because they are actors”.

Many others will say they don't and depend on the designated personnel to do it for them.

[Anonymous]

George would have never said that if one of his pals, like Julia Roberts, was involved in the shooting.