Alec Baldwin fatally shot someone on movie set with gun mishap

[Anonymous]

If the armorer was the one who put live rounds in the gun and forgot to take them out, I bet she is criminally charged with negligent homicide or maybe manslaughter.
The AD is an ass but I’d guess no charges for him. His career is over and he’ll probably have to file for Bankruptcy due to civil suits. I wonder if the producers also cheaped out on their liability insurance. I think criminal charges would complicate the insurance coverage but that may depend on the policy terms and state law.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:After giving this some more consideration, I have to change my position that Alec is definitely at fault. If it went down exactly as he said, and he didn't pull the trigger at all, and the gun just misfired, it's not his fault.

If he did pull the trigger, it's his fault. He is also at fault for perjury in that case.

That's not what perjury means. Is this sarcasm?

No. His signed affidavit that he provided to police says that the gun went off by itself.

But he still aimed it in the direction of people. You're being inconsistent. Not matter what else was happening, it's still his fault. That's what you've saying for days.

Dp- AB aimed where he was instructed to aim, and shot the people who instructed him to do it.
This isn’t a simple case.

Whether he pulled the trigger or not, whether he aimed at the camera or at the people or had only drawn the gun from the holster when it fired, all the ghouls pointing fingers at AB are being ghoulish.

It's not a hard case. The armorer is at fault. To a lesser extent, the sloppy assistant director is at fault. The director and the actor aren't.

I don’t disagree, but what do I know! I’m only a member of IATSE who has worked on various film sets. I haven’t be trained by navy seals 🙄

[Anonymous]

I too doubt that AB will be charged.

I'm anti-gun, but I don't like AB. However, I don't think this is his fault.

If reports are accurate, there was real ammunition on the set, apparently because some idiot used the prop gun for target practice and returned it without clearing the gun properly. I wouldn't want to be that person.

The armorer MAY be liable. It's also possible that she properly checked the gun and AFTER that someone took it and used it for target practice WITHOUT her knowledge while she was at lunch. She may still be negligent if she was responsible for securing the guns when they weren't in use and that enabled someone to take one without her knowledge.

The AD then grabbed the gun and apparently without checking it handed it to AB announcing "cold gun." It was his responsibility to check it. If you've listened to the 911 call, you heard the head script writer calling him #%C&&&!!! She was standing next to the cinematographer when she was shot and she clearly blamed the AD.

Other people have said under oath that the AD said "cold gun" when he handed it to Baldwin. Perhaps due to the union issue, only one camera was operational. The light had changed and the director told Baldwin to point the gun at the camera to line up the shot. AB did so. There is no reason to think he pulled the trigger doing it.

I think most of us would agree that it's unlikely that the director would tell AB to pull the trigger when the director was standing in front of the gun.

So...I think that the idiot who put bullets in the gun for target practice and failed to remove all the bullets, if that story is true, is criminally liable. The armorer MAY be liable if it was her decision to leave the guns on the cart and/or she was aware of the target practice . The AD is almost certainly liable. I really don't think AB is liable.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I too doubt that AB will be charged.

I'm anti-gun, but I don't like AB. However, I don't think this is his fault.

If reports are accurate, there was real ammunition on the set, apparently because some idiot used the prop gun for target practice and returned it without clearing the gun properly. I wouldn't want to be that person.

The armorer MAY be liable. It's also possible that she properly checked the gun and AFTER that someone took it and used it for target practice WITHOUT her knowledge while she was at lunch. She may still be negligent if she was responsible for securing the guns when they weren't in use and that enabled someone to take one without her knowledge.

The AD then grabbed the gun and apparently without checking it handed it to AB announcing "cold gun." It was his responsibility to check it. If you've listened to the 911 call, you heard the head script writer calling him #%C&&&!!! She was standing next to the cinematographer when she was shot and she clearly blamed the AD.

Other people have said under oath that the AD said "cold gun" when he handed it to Baldwin. Perhaps due to the union issue, only one camera was operational. The light had changed and the director told Baldwin to point the gun at the camera to line up the shot. AB did so. There is no reason to think he pulled the trigger doing it.

I think most of us would agree that it's unlikely that the director would tell AB to pull the trigger when the director was standing in front of the gun.

So...I think that the idiot who put bullets in the gun for target practice and failed to remove all the bullets, if that story is true, is criminally liable. The armorer MAY be liable if it was her decision to leave the guns on the cart and/or she was aware of the target practice . The AD is almost certainly liable. I really don't think AB is liable.

I can think of one very likely reason to believe that he pulled the trigger, namely that the gun fired.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:After giving this some more consideration, I have to change my position that Alec is definitely at fault. If it went down exactly as he said, and he didn't pull the trigger at all, and the gun just misfired, it's not his fault.

If he did pull the trigger, it's his fault. He is also at fault for perjury in that case.

That's not what perjury means. Is this sarcasm?

No. His signed affidavit that he provided to police says that the gun went off by itself.

But he still aimed it in the direction of people. You're being inconsistent. Not matter what else was happening, it's still his fault. That's what you've saying for days.

Dp- AB aimed where he was instructed to aim, and shot the people who instructed him to do it.
This isn’t a simple case.

Whether he pulled the trigger or not, whether he aimed at the camera or at the people or had only drawn the gun from the holster when it fired, all the ghouls pointing fingers at AB are being ghoulish.

It's not a hard case. The armorer is at fault. To a lesser extent, the sloppy assistant director is at fault. The director and the actor aren't.

I don’t disagree, but what do I know! I’m only a member of IATSE who has worked on various film sets. I haven’t be trained by navy seals 🙄

Are you a sampling of the arrogance in the movie industry? If so, people like you are exactly why this woman is dead. I’m the person who hired a retired SEAL to teach me firearms safety/training. I hired him because the company he formed wants to ensure that these types of accidents do not happen. You have rule and protocols, etc. We get that. Bottom line? They didn’t work because the person who actually fired the gun did not check to see what was chambered, if anything. All your checks and balances do not supersede the responsibility of the person who pulls the trigger. Amend your protocols to reflect that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:After giving this some more consideration, I have to change my position that Alec is definitely at fault. If it went down exactly as he said, and he didn't pull the trigger at all, and the gun just misfired, it's not his fault.

If he did pull the trigger, it's his fault. He is also at fault for perjury in that case.

That's not what perjury means. Is this sarcasm?

No. His signed affidavit that he provided to police says that the gun went off by itself.

But he still aimed it in the direction of people. You're being inconsistent. Not matter what else was happening, it's still his fault. That's what you've saying for days.

Dp- AB aimed where he was instructed to aim, and shot the people who instructed him to do it.
This isn’t a simple case.

Whether he pulled the trigger or not, whether he aimed at the camera or at the people or had only drawn the gun from the holster when it fired, all the ghouls pointing fingers at AB are being ghoulish.

It's not a hard case. The armorer is at fault. To a lesser extent, the sloppy assistant director is at fault. The director and the actor aren't.

I don’t disagree, but what do I know! I’m only a member of IATSE who has worked on various film sets. I haven’t be trained by navy seals 🙄

She knows more than you! First of all, she’s a woman. (This is an important credential, because she likes to crow that other posters can’t tell she’s sans penis). Second, she was deployed - not to Nollywood or something, but to war, which is more applicable somehow. Third, give her or some of her fellow cub creeps some time, okay?

There are two women speaking up, just to clarify.

[Anonymous]

Same PP as above..

I suspect the policy said directly or incorporated certain standard procedures which state that the policy only applies if no real ammunition is brought onto the set. If the gun had a real bullet in it and not a blank--the police have the casing --the insurance company will fight coverage.

[Anonymous]

Yes, let’s clarify, PP. You’re doing God’s work, woman. As a woman, can I just say your woman’s perspective on this tragedy has been magnificent? Thank you, woman to woman.

Would other women like to ring in with this important credential? Thank you.

[Anonymous]

I have no idea why people think that no matter what rules are in place, somehow AB gets a pass on not checking the gun. If AB was drunk, but someone told him it was ok to drive because movie sets have different standards for drunk driving, would he get a pass then?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I have no idea why people think that no matter what rules are in place, somehow AB gets a pass on not checking the gun. If AB was drunk, but someone told him it was ok to drive because movie sets have different standards for drunk driving, would he get a pass then?

What kind of analogy is that? Work harder, come up with something better. Or worse.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have no idea why people think that no matter what rules are in place, somehow AB gets a pass on not checking the gun. If AB was drunk, but someone told him it was ok to drive because movie sets have different standards for drunk driving, would he get a pass then?

What kind of analogy is that? Work harder, come up with something better. Or worse.

Not pp, but to anyone who has been around guns checking the chamber is as basic as not drinking and driving and saying that someone told you it was ok is just as inexcusable in both instances.

[Anonymous]

Alec Baldwin says he pulled the trigger. There is no "it went off by accident" he pulled the trigger and killed someone. If you point a gun at someone and pull the trigger without checking (especially a revolver) that is 100% on you. If he stabbed them would it not be his fault because someone handed him the knife?

[Anonymous]

Dollars to donuts, AB didn't know there were real bullets on set.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I have no idea why people think that no matter what rules are in place, somehow AB gets a pass on not checking the gun. If AB was drunk, but someone told him it was ok to drive because movie sets have different standards for drunk driving, would he get a pass then?

Well guess what? If he’s ultimately at fault, he will be charged.
The posters that have experience in the business are seemingly unanimous in thinking that he won’t be charged.
But let’s improve your analogy…
On a movie set AB is given what he is told is a non alcoholic beverage.
Turns out props have given him whiskey ( in this scenario AB can’t taste)
He drives home from set and is stopped for drunk driving.
Is he at fault?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Dollars to donuts, AB didn't know there were real bullets on set.

+1