Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:
She left out the part where they have a private entrance in the back. So she's creating a spectacle on purpose to gain insta followers.
Her accent y'all. She's unbelievable. "Plis! We have kids!" Ummm, you are literally dressing up in a diamond necklace for a 7am pap walk. Ma'am, this is not how to gain privacy.
She wants peace for her kids, yet she brings a baby out there with her instead of leaving it with the army of Nannie’s inside.And that accent. She is so very crazy.
Anonymous wrote:
She left out the part where they have a private entrance in the back. So she's creating a spectacle on purpose to gain insta followers.
Her accent y'all. She's unbelievable. "Plis! We have kids!" Ummm, you are literally dressing up in a diamond necklace for a 7am pap walk. Ma'am, this is not how to gain privacy.
And that accent. She is so very crazy.Anonymous wrote:
She left out the part where they have a private entrance in the back. So she's creating a spectacle on purpose to gain insta followers.
Her accent y'all. She's unbelievable. "Plis! We have kids!" Ummm, you are literally dressing up in a diamond necklace for a 7am pap walk. Ma'am, this is not how to gain privacy.
Anonymous wrote:Dick Cheney shot someone. I never want to hear that "the liberals" get off easy.
For the record, I don't have any love for either Baldwin or Cheney.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:The armorer on set was also charged.
Also reasonable.
It’s ironic that a guy who has so often voiced his hatred of the NRA and guns is now charged with shooting more people than 99.999999% of NRA members. [/qu
I think his situation is a cautionary tale about guns too. The presence of guns increases the risk of death.
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 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 wrote: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 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.