Crew member fatally shot on set of Alec Baldwin movie

Everything else!

Moderators: Bakhtosh, EvilHomer3k

Post Reply
User avatar
Kurth
Posts: 5882
Joined: Tue Jan 04, 2005 1:19 am
Location: Portland

Re: Crew member fatally shot on set of Alec Baldwin movie

Post by Kurth »

This definitely caught me by surprise as well. I'd be really interested to know what additional info caused the DA to charge Baldwin with a crime.
Just 'cause you feel it, doesn't mean it's there -- Radiohead
Do you believe me? Do you trust me? Do you like me? 😳
User avatar
dbt1949
Posts: 25688
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 12:34 am
Location: Hogeye Arkansas

Re: Crew member fatally shot on set of Alec Baldwin movie

Post by dbt1949 »

Oddly enough I have the exact copy of the type gun that was used. Same manufacturer and everything.


“Involuntary manslaughter consists of manslaughter committed in the commission of an unlawful act not amounting to felony, or in the commission of a lawful act which might produce death in an unlawful manner or without due caution and circumspection,” according to New Mexico law.

The prosecutors are using the second half or the law.
Ye Olde Farte
Double Ought Forty
aka dbt1949
User avatar
gilraen
Posts: 4313
Joined: Wed Sep 04, 2013 7:45 pm
Location: Broomfield, CO

Re: Crew member fatally shot on set of Alec Baldwin movie

Post by gilraen »

Kurth wrote: Fri Jan 20, 2023 1:26 pm This definitely caught me by surprise as well. I'd be really interested to know what additional info caused the DA to charge Baldwin with a crime.
The cynic in me says that there's no new evidence - just too much media & PR issues around this case, so the NM DA figured it looks bad for her if she doesn't bring up criminal charges against Baldwin. I can see there being civil charges (and possibly charges of criminal negligence) against him as a producer, since clearly the producing company tried to cut costs and didn't hire the proper experts. But involuntary manslaughter - that's preposterous.
User avatar
Max Peck
Posts: 13682
Joined: Fri Aug 05, 2005 8:09 pm
Location: Down the Rabbit-Hole

Re: Crew member fatally shot on set of Alec Baldwin movie

Post by Max Peck »

Alec Baldwin Charges Spur Debate on Responsibility for Guns on Set
The prosecutors in New Mexico who made the decision to charge the actor Alec Baldwin with involuntary manslaughter for the fatal shooting of a cinematographer on the “Rust” movie set said on Thursday that he bore responsibility for ensuring that the gun he was handed did not contain live rounds.

He doesn’t actually have to touch each projectile, each piece of ammunition,” Mary Carmack-Altwies, the district attorney in Santa Fe County, said in an interview after the decision to charge him in the death of the cinematographer, Halyna Hutchins, was announced. “He has an absolute duty to know that what is in the gun that is being placed in his hand is safe.
How does that work, exactly? How can you require someone to be absolutely sure that the contents of the weapon is safe without requiring them to physically check it?
But some armorers, actors, union leaders and others who work in the film industry questioned the assertion by prosecutors that actors bore the responsibility to check the guns they were handed on set.

“People in the industry are acting with surprise that Baldwin is hit hard on this as much as he is, and that others in the food chain are not,” said Dutch Merrick, a studio armorer and instructor who has worked on movies including “First Man” and the show “SEAL Team.”

“I honestly think that the district attorney profoundly misunderstands the process of handling guns on sets,” Mr. Merrick said. “There is no hard-and-fast rule that says an actor must check a gun.”
But Bryan W. Carpenter, an armorer who is advising the Santa Fe district attorney’s office, said that there had been a trend to sacrifice safety on movie sets in favor of speed, and that all people handling weapons or ammunition on a set — including actors — had a duty to check them.

“Everyone is responsible for that,” he said.

The prosecutors said they had interviewed several actors who told them they did check their own firearms to make sure they were safe to handle.
It sounds like some productions, and some actors, hold the performers to higher standards in terms of safe weapon handling, but there isn't an actual industry standard that makes the actors personally responsible for weapon safety.
"What? What? What?" -- The 14th Doctor

It's not enough to be a good player... you also have to play well. -- Siegbert Tarrasch
User avatar
Kurth
Posts: 5882
Joined: Tue Jan 04, 2005 1:19 am
Location: Portland

Re: Crew member fatally shot on set of Alec Baldwin movie

Post by Kurth »

gilraen wrote: Fri Jan 20, 2023 1:49 pm
Kurth wrote: Fri Jan 20, 2023 1:26 pm This definitely caught me by surprise as well. I'd be really interested to know what additional info caused the DA to charge Baldwin with a crime.
The cynic in me says that there's no new evidence - just too much media & PR issues around this case, so the NM DA figured it looks bad for her if she doesn't bring up criminal charges against Baldwin. I can see there being civil charges (and possibly charges of criminal negligence) against him as a producer, since clearly the producing company tried to cut costs and didn't hire the proper experts. But involuntary manslaughter - that's preposterous.
I believe there was already a civil suit brought by Hutchinson's husband against Baldwin, and it settled. It's not the husband that's driving this.
Just 'cause you feel it, doesn't mean it's there -- Radiohead
Do you believe me? Do you trust me? Do you like me? 😳
User avatar
Kurth
Posts: 5882
Joined: Tue Jan 04, 2005 1:19 am
Location: Portland

Re: Crew member fatally shot on set of Alec Baldwin movie

Post by Kurth »

Max Peck wrote: Fri Jan 20, 2023 1:49 pm Alec Baldwin Charges Spur Debate on Responsibility for Guns on Set
The prosecutors in New Mexico who made the decision to charge the actor Alec Baldwin with involuntary manslaughter for the fatal shooting of a cinematographer on the “Rust” movie set said on Thursday that he bore responsibility for ensuring that the gun he was handed did not contain live rounds.

He doesn’t actually have to touch each projectile, each piece of ammunition,” Mary Carmack-Altwies, the district attorney in Santa Fe County, said in an interview after the decision to charge him in the death of the cinematographer, Halyna Hutchins, was announced. “He has an absolute duty to know that what is in the gun that is being placed in his hand is safe.
How does that work, exactly? How can you require someone to be absolutely sure that the contents of the weapon is safe without requiring them to physically check it?
But some armorers, actors, union leaders and others who work in the film industry questioned the assertion by prosecutors that actors bore the responsibility to check the guns they were handed on set.

“People in the industry are acting with surprise that Baldwin is hit hard on this as much as he is, and that others in the food chain are not,” said Dutch Merrick, a studio armorer and instructor who has worked on movies including “First Man” and the show “SEAL Team.”

“I honestly think that the district attorney profoundly misunderstands the process of handling guns on sets,” Mr. Merrick said. “There is no hard-and-fast rule that says an actor must check a gun.”
But Bryan W. Carpenter, an armorer who is advising the Santa Fe district attorney’s office, said that there had been a trend to sacrifice safety on movie sets in favor of speed, and that all people handling weapons or ammunition on a set — including actors — had a duty to check them.

“Everyone is responsible for that,” he said.

The prosecutors said they had interviewed several actors who told them they did check their own firearms to make sure they were safe to handle.
It sounds like some productions, and some actors, hold the performers to higher standards in terms of safe weapon handling, but there isn't an actual industry standard that makes the actors personally responsible for weapon safety.
This also makes no sense to me. Actors are not experts in firearms. How is an actor with no real firearm training supposed to be verifying with 100% certainty that a gun they are being handed is safe? Isn't it reasonable for them to rely on experts for that? This just seems crazy to me. Unless there's some other info out there that implicates Baldwin directly -- other than that the gun was in his hand when Hutchinson was show -- this seems wrong.
Just 'cause you feel it, doesn't mean it's there -- Radiohead
Do you believe me? Do you trust me? Do you like me? 😳
User avatar
Max Peck
Posts: 13682
Joined: Fri Aug 05, 2005 8:09 pm
Location: Down the Rabbit-Hole

Re: Crew member fatally shot on set of Alec Baldwin movie

Post by Max Peck »

I've also seen at least one report where the family's lawyer welcomed charges being brought (although not getting into whether the charges against Baldwin were appropriate).
"What? What? What?" -- The 14th Doctor

It's not enough to be a good player... you also have to play well. -- Siegbert Tarrasch
User avatar
Blackhawk
Posts: 43501
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 9:48 pm
Location: Southwest Indiana

Re: Crew member fatally shot on set of Alec Baldwin movie

Post by Blackhawk »

It's not going to be practical on a fast-paced movie set for an actor to check every round of ammunition he's given. What about a military film with box magazines? Is an actor expected to unpack and repack all 200 rounds for an M249? And every extra magazine? It's good range safety basics, but it would make shooting films impossible. So you have people who are experts to ensure that the guns are safe, and the actor should be able to trust the armorer and the studio that hired them - that's how the actor makes sure the gun is safe, by having an expert on hand to make sure it is. You also have safety precautions to avoid pointing the gun at people. Many films, from what I've read, use trick shots (the gun isn't quite lined up with the target, but the camera angle is such that you wouldn't notice that it's pointed six inches to the side), or if the gun's to be pointed toward crew, they either use remote cameras or a bullet resistant 'wall' between them and the gun.

You have experts, and you have safety precautions. Both failed in this case.
(˙pǝsɹǝʌǝɹ uǝǝq sɐɥ ʎʇıʌɐɹƃ ʃɐuosɹǝd ʎW)
User avatar
YellowKing
Posts: 30126
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 2:02 pm

Re: Crew member fatally shot on set of Alec Baldwin movie

Post by YellowKing »

The only way this makes sense is if they can prove he was being negligent in pulling the trigger of the gun. But I think they'd have to prove that there were rules in place prohibiting this and that he was well aware of these rules but did it anyway.
User avatar
Smoove_B
Posts: 54567
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 12:58 am
Location: Kaer Morhen

Re: Crew member fatally shot on set of Alec Baldwin movie

Post by Smoove_B »

Blackhawk wrote: Fri Jan 20, 2023 2:01 pm You have experts, and you have safety precautions. Both failed in this case.
Where this all falls apart for me is the well known "rule" that you never point a gun at someone - unless your intention is to shoot them.

I don't have any experience working in film so I don't know if what you're saying is true - that they set up a scene to make it look like people are shooting at each other, but in reality they aren't. That anytime you see muzzle flash or other effects, those guns aren't aimed at people and/or it's post-production effects that are edited in.

In this case Baldwin was setting up a shot where he's aiming at the camera. I would have thought then the camera would be set up without someone near it -or- the gun effects (smoke, flash, etc...) would be edited in and he'd be holding a dummy prop that had zero ability to fire.

Maybe I'm wrong and during movies and TV shows there are lots of guns filled with blanks that people are firing at one another, but given what happened with Brandon Lee, it seems like the chances of something bad happening would eventually manifest if that was the case.

I'm not sure any of that makes him "guilty" in the broad sense, but it just seems like it would be insane practice as part of a movie or TV show production to allow an actor to shoot any type of gun for any reason that is aimed at a person.
Maybe next year, maybe no go
User avatar
Max Peck
Posts: 13682
Joined: Fri Aug 05, 2005 8:09 pm
Location: Down the Rabbit-Hole

Re: Crew member fatally shot on set of Alec Baldwin movie

Post by Max Peck »

One of the armourers quoted in the NYT article as saying that actors do have a duty for firearm safety is also the armourer who is advising the prosecutor. That may have something to do with the decision to charge Baldwin.
"What? What? What?" -- The 14th Doctor

It's not enough to be a good player... you also have to play well. -- Siegbert Tarrasch
User avatar
Alefroth
Posts: 8489
Joined: Thu Oct 14, 2004 1:56 pm
Location: Bellingham WA

Re: Crew member fatally shot on set of Alec Baldwin movie

Post by Alefroth »

Unagi wrote: Fri Jan 20, 2023 11:22 am
Max Peck wrote: Fri Jan 20, 2023 11:09 am Baldwin's wiggle room with a jury probably lies in whether they accept the argument that he should have been able to trust his staff when they handed him the weapon and told him that it was safe. I'm not seeing how the armourer has any outs at all, and I'm a little surprised that the assistant director who allegedly physically handed the weapon to Baldwin and told him it was safe hasn't been charged as well, since it was supposedly part of his job to double-check that it was safe to handle.
Yeah, from my understanding - it's basically everyone but the final actor's responsibility to check the gun.
You'd think any tampering of the gun (including checking the ammo) after the final clearance would render it unsafe again.
User avatar
Blackhawk
Posts: 43501
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 9:48 pm
Location: Southwest Indiana

Re: Crew member fatally shot on set of Alec Baldwin movie

Post by Blackhawk »

Smoove_B wrote: Fri Jan 20, 2023 2:13 pm
Blackhawk wrote: Fri Jan 20, 2023 2:01 pm You have experts, and you have safety precautions. Both failed in this case.
Where this all falls apart for me is the well known "rule" that you never point a gun at someone - unless your intention is to shoot them.

I don't have any experience working in film so I don't know if what you're saying is true - that they set up a scene to make it look like people are shooting at each other, but in reality they aren't. That anytime you see muzzle flash or other effects, those guns aren't aimed at people and/or it's post-production effects that are edited in.

In this case Baldwin was setting up a shot where he's aiming at the camera. I would have thought then the camera would be set up without someone near it -or- the gun effects (smoke, flash, etc...) would be edited in and he'd be holding a dummy prop that had zero ability to fire.

Maybe I'm wrong and during movies and TV shows there are lots of guns filled with blanks that people are firing at one another, but given what happened with Brandon Lee, it seems like the chances of something bad happening would eventually manifest if that was the case.

I'm not sure any of that makes him "guilty" in the broad sense, but it just seems like it would be insane practice as part of a movie or TV show production to allow an actor to shoot any type of gun for any reason that is aimed at a person.
Which is why I said that most films don't. Guns are pointed to the side, at robotic cameras, or at barriers. But again, I don't see that as the actor's responsibility, at least not to the degree that would justify criminal charges.
(˙pǝsɹǝʌǝɹ uǝǝq sɐɥ ʎʇıʌɐɹƃ ʃɐuosɹǝd ʎW)
User avatar
Smoove_B
Posts: 54567
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 12:58 am
Location: Kaer Morhen

Re: Crew member fatally shot on set of Alec Baldwin movie

Post by Smoove_B »

Blackhawk wrote: Fri Jan 20, 2023 2:17 pm Which is why I said that most films don't. Guns are pointed to the side, at robotic cameras, or at barriers. But again, I don't see that as the actor's responsibility, at least not to the degree that would justify criminal charges.
Which is why I said I have no idea if it's normal. I'd like to think if I was an actor with 30+ years of experience and someone handed me a gun on the set and told me to aim at another actor or a person holding a camera, I'd ask WTF they were talking about.

I don't get the impression Baldwin did that which means (to me) he has no experience with firearms, it's more common than we think to aim guns at people in movies and TV shows, or he really believed the gun he was holding was incapable of doing what it did.
Maybe next year, maybe no go
User avatar
jztemple2
Posts: 11545
Joined: Fri Feb 13, 2009 7:52 am
Location: Brevard County, Florida, USA

Re: Crew member fatally shot on set of Alec Baldwin movie

Post by jztemple2 »

Kurth wrote: Fri Jan 20, 2023 1:58 pm This also makes no sense to me. Actors are not experts in firearms.
I mostly agree with this. However, you don't need to be an expert for instance on how a car works to know how to put the shift into park and put on the parking brake so it doesn't roll over you when you are changing a tire. One minute of instruction would be enough to demonstrate how to verify if a weapon is safe.

Assuming the prosecutors aren't going for some hidden motive to show intent, then to me the case is about whether someone can be held criminally liable for not demonstrating what is seen in hindsight as due care.
My father said that anything is interesting if you bother to read about it - Michael C. Harrold
User avatar
Alefroth
Posts: 8489
Joined: Thu Oct 14, 2004 1:56 pm
Location: Bellingham WA

Re: Crew member fatally shot on set of Alec Baldwin movie

Post by Alefroth »

Kurth wrote: Fri Jan 20, 2023 1:26 pm This definitely caught me by surprise as well. I'd be really interested to know what additional info caused the DA to charge Baldwin with a crime.
Sounds like it was 'recklessness'-

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/202 ... 1674229836
User avatar
YellowKing
Posts: 30126
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 2:02 pm

Re: Crew member fatally shot on set of Alec Baldwin movie

Post by YellowKing »

I think it's *reasonable* for the actor to assume the weapon is safe when it is handed to them, because it has presumably gone through a system of checks to ensure that safety. That's why those safeguards are there - so the actor doesn't have to take it upon themselves to verify.

I think the real crux of the issue is whether Baldwin acted carelessly in pointing the gun at the camera. This would require knowing what the rules/standards were on set, whether he was instructed to do so, etc. Stuff we don't really know.

I think the argument that Baldwin was negligent in checking the gun is a non-starter. The argument that he was negligent on how he handled the weapon after it was given to him has possible merit, depending on the answers to the questions above.

[Edit] Well there you go, Alefroth's post kind of points to what I'm talking about.
User avatar
Max Peck
Posts: 13682
Joined: Fri Aug 05, 2005 8:09 pm
Location: Down the Rabbit-Hole

Re: Crew member fatally shot on set of Alec Baldwin movie

Post by Max Peck »

Smoove_B wrote: Fri Jan 20, 2023 2:13 pm I'm not sure any of that makes him "guilty" in the broad sense, but it just seems like it would be insane practice as part of a movie or TV show production to allow an actor to shoot any type of gun for any reason that is aimed at a person.
Nobody, including Baldwin, had any intention of shooting the weapon. It had been handed to him by someone whose job entailed confirming the weapon's status and who told him it was unloaded and safe to handle. Presumably other precautions and procedures would have been in place if the weapon was intended to be loaded with blanks of some sort, and the live ammunition that actually was in the weapon should never have been on site in the first place.

In a lot of ways, this is a classic failure of imagination. Neither Baldwin nor the shooting victims believed that there was any danger because they were working with a "cold" weapon, and it didn't occur to anyone on the set that the chain of custody of the weapon may have been broken and that neither the armourer nor the assistant director had actually done their jobs.
"What? What? What?" -- The 14th Doctor

It's not enough to be a good player... you also have to play well. -- Siegbert Tarrasch
User avatar
El Guapo
Posts: 41247
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2005 4:01 pm
Location: Boston

Re: Crew member fatally shot on set of Alec Baldwin movie

Post by El Guapo »

Max Peck wrote: Fri Jan 20, 2023 2:37 pm
Smoove_B wrote: Fri Jan 20, 2023 2:13 pm I'm not sure any of that makes him "guilty" in the broad sense, but it just seems like it would be insane practice as part of a movie or TV show production to allow an actor to shoot any type of gun for any reason that is aimed at a person.
Nobody, including Baldwin, had any intention of shooting the weapon. It had been handed to him by someone whose job entailed confirming the weapon's status and who told him it was unloaded and safe to handle. Presumably other precautions and procedures would have been in place if the weapon was intended to be loaded with blanks of some sort, and the live ammunition that actually was in the weapon should never have been on site in the first place.

In a lot of ways, this is a classic failure of imagination. Neither Baldwin nor the shooting victims believed that there was any danger because they were working with a "cold" weapon, and it didn't occur to anyone on the set that the chain of custody of the weapon may have been broken and that neither the armourer nor the assistant director had actually done their jobs.
I think that there's a lot that we don't know here. *If* Baldwin pointed and fired the gun based on the representation given to him that the weapon was cold, and assuming this is following standard processes in movies, then yeah, seems super tough to argue that he was criminally reckless.

However, just the fact that this is being charged in a high profile matter suggests to me that the DA has some evidence suggesting that's not the case. Also possible that the DA is being very aggressive and reckless. But I don't think that we have much way to know which one it is. FWIW I have seen some stuff suggesting that there were real issues with this weapons person. At a certain point there could have been enough that Baldwin should have known not to do what he did.
Black Lives Matter.
User avatar
Rumpy
Posts: 12674
Joined: Sun Mar 27, 2005 6:52 pm
Location: Sudbury, Ontario, Canada

Re: Crew member fatally shot on set of Alec Baldwin movie

Post by Rumpy »

Kurth wrote: Fri Jan 20, 2023 1:58 pm

This also makes no sense to me. Actors are not experts in firearms. How is an actor with no real firearm training supposed to be verifying with 100% certainty that a gun they are being handed is safe? Isn't it reasonable for them to rely on experts for that? This just seems crazy to me. Unless there's some other info out there that implicates Baldwin directly -- other than that the gun was in his hand when Hutchinson was show -- this seems wrong.
Yeah, it's baffling. As an actor, he was was handed the gun for his scene while being told it was safe. How was he supposed to know there was live ammunition in it? It was a variable hidden away from him. The fact that he unfortunately killed someone was a grave consequence, but the weight of this should be on the armorer and whoever touched the gun before, including the night before, not him. He's already going to be dealing with the trauma and possibly PTSD from this, and I wouldn't be surprised if he announces his retirement from acting, or at the very least have something in his contract requesting not handling any guns. The only way this makes any sense is if he was also a producer in the movie where blame is laid on him for mistakes in production.
PC:
Ryzen 5 3600
32GB RAM
2x1TB NVMe Drives
GTX 1660 Ti
User avatar
Kurth
Posts: 5882
Joined: Tue Jan 04, 2005 1:19 am
Location: Portland

Re: Crew member fatally shot on set of Alec Baldwin movie

Post by Kurth »

Alefroth wrote: Fri Jan 20, 2023 2:30 pm
Kurth wrote: Fri Jan 20, 2023 1:26 pm This definitely caught me by surprise as well. I'd be really interested to know what additional info caused the DA to charge Baldwin with a crime.
Sounds like it was 'recklessness'-

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/202 ... 1674229836
Whatever that means. I'd need to see some clear evidence that Baldwin mishandled the weapon in a way that runs contrary to industry standards and that Baldwin's actions caused the shooting. If all he did was fail to verify that the weapon was safe to handle, that doesn't seem like a strong argument in support of criminal charges.
Just 'cause you feel it, doesn't mean it's there -- Radiohead
Do you believe me? Do you trust me? Do you like me? 😳
User avatar
El Guapo
Posts: 41247
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2005 4:01 pm
Location: Boston

Re: Crew member fatally shot on set of Alec Baldwin movie

Post by El Guapo »

Kurth wrote: Fri Jan 20, 2023 3:41 pm
Alefroth wrote: Fri Jan 20, 2023 2:30 pm
Kurth wrote: Fri Jan 20, 2023 1:26 pm This definitely caught me by surprise as well. I'd be really interested to know what additional info caused the DA to charge Baldwin with a crime.
Sounds like it was 'recklessness'-

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/202 ... 1674229836
Whatever that means. I'd need to see some clear evidence that Baldwin mishandled the weapon in a way that runs contrary to industry standards and that Baldwin's actions caused the shooting. If all he did was fail to verify that the weapon was safe to handle, that doesn't seem like a strong argument in support of criminal charges.
Yeah. I mean, the DA will need to prove the charges.
Black Lives Matter.
User avatar
The Meal
Posts: 27987
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 10:33 pm
Location: 2005 Stanley Cup Champion

Re: Crew member fatally shot on set of Alec Baldwin movie

Post by The Meal »

Do we have any indication that the DA gives two flying fucks what the industry standard is was?
"Better to talk to people than communicate via tweet." — Elontra
User avatar
Max Peck
Posts: 13682
Joined: Fri Aug 05, 2005 8:09 pm
Location: Down the Rabbit-Hole

Re: Crew member fatally shot on set of Alec Baldwin movie

Post by Max Peck »

The Meal wrote: Fri Jan 20, 2023 8:10 pm Do we have any indication that the DA gives two flying fucks what the industry standard is was?
She presumably has some interest in it if she engaged an industry armourer as an adviser (rather than solely relying on non-industry firearm safety experts) and interviewed other actors.
"What? What? What?" -- The 14th Doctor

It's not enough to be a good player... you also have to play well. -- Siegbert Tarrasch
User avatar
em2nought
Posts: 5309
Joined: Fri Oct 15, 2004 5:48 am

Re: Crew member fatally shot on set of Alec Baldwin movie

Post by em2nought »

I so "need" a peacemaker, I hope they don't find it necessary to somehow blame and ban them after this incident.
Technically, he shouldn't be here.
User avatar
Victoria Raverna
Posts: 5013
Joined: Fri Oct 15, 2004 2:23 am
Location: Jakarta

Re: Crew member fatally shot on set of Alec Baldwin movie

Post by Victoria Raverna »

El Guapo wrote: Fri Jan 20, 2023 2:52 pm
Max Peck wrote: Fri Jan 20, 2023 2:37 pm
Smoove_B wrote: Fri Jan 20, 2023 2:13 pm I'm not sure any of that makes him "guilty" in the broad sense, but it just seems like it would be insane practice as part of a movie or TV show production to allow an actor to shoot any type of gun for any reason that is aimed at a person.
Nobody, including Baldwin, had any intention of shooting the weapon. It had been handed to him by someone whose job entailed confirming the weapon's status and who told him it was unloaded and safe to handle. Presumably other precautions and procedures would have been in place if the weapon was intended to be loaded with blanks of some sort, and the live ammunition that actually was in the weapon should never have been on site in the first place.

In a lot of ways, this is a classic failure of imagination. Neither Baldwin nor the shooting victims believed that there was any danger because they were working with a "cold" weapon, and it didn't occur to anyone on the set that the chain of custody of the weapon may have been broken and that neither the armourer nor the assistant director had actually done their jobs.
I think that there's a lot that we don't know here. *If* Baldwin pointed and fired the gun based on the representation given to him that the weapon was cold, and assuming this is following standard processes in movies, then yeah, seems super tough to argue that he was criminally reckless.

However, just the fact that this is being charged in a high profile matter suggests to me that the DA has some evidence suggesting that's not the case. Also possible that the DA is being very aggressive and reckless. But I don't think that we have much way to know which one it is. FWIW I have seen some stuff suggesting that there were real issues with this weapons person. At a certain point there could have been enough that Baldwin should have known not to do what he did.
I think the DA charged Baldwin because Baldwin is a wealthy celebrity. She doesn't want stupid people to think that Baldwin was not charged because he is rich and famous while an armorer was charged because she is not rich and famous.
User avatar
Victoria Raverna
Posts: 5013
Joined: Fri Oct 15, 2004 2:23 am
Location: Jakarta

Re: Crew member fatally shot on set of Alec Baldwin movie

Post by Victoria Raverna »

Rumpy wrote: Fri Jan 20, 2023 3:20 pm
Kurth wrote: Fri Jan 20, 2023 1:58 pm

This also makes no sense to me. Actors are not experts in firearms. How is an actor with no real firearm training supposed to be verifying with 100% certainty that a gun they are being handed is safe? Isn't it reasonable for them to rely on experts for that? This just seems crazy to me. Unless there's some other info out there that implicates Baldwin directly -- other than that the gun was in his hand when Hutchinson was show -- this seems wrong.
Yeah, it's baffling. As an actor, he was was handed the gun for his scene while being told it was safe. How was he supposed to know there was live ammunition in it? It was a variable hidden away from him. The fact that he unfortunately killed someone was a grave consequence, but the weight of this should be on the armorer and whoever touched the gun before, including the night before, not him. He's already going to be dealing with the trauma and possibly PTSD from this, and I wouldn't be surprised if he announces his retirement from acting, or at the very least have something in his contract requesting not handling any guns. The only way this makes any sense is if he was also a producer in the movie where blame is laid on him for mistakes in production.
He was also the producer but not the only producer.
User avatar
gilraen
Posts: 4313
Joined: Wed Sep 04, 2013 7:45 pm
Location: Broomfield, CO

Re: Crew member fatally shot on set of Alec Baldwin movie

Post by gilraen »

User avatar
Octavious
Posts: 20035
Joined: Fri Oct 15, 2004 2:50 pm

Re: Crew member fatally shot on set of Alec Baldwin movie

Post by Octavious »

Honestly the person in charge of the weapons is the one that should be getting ripped apart. It kind of amazes me that in this day and age a real gun even ever makes it onto a set. We had something similar happen at the Old West theme park near my house. Someone loaded real bullets by accident and shot someone during a show. They lived, but they are disabled for life. :shock:

Note who got the most money. Spoiler not the person in the wheelchair. ;)
https://www.nj.com/sussex-county/2014/1 ... _says.html

Scott Harris, the actor who was left partially paralyzed in the shooting, will receive about $323,000 in the settlement, with the bulk of the money — about $1 million — going toward his workers’ compensation insurance, the newspaper reported. The remainder of the settlement, about $530,000, will go to his attorneys, the newspaper reported.
Capitalism tries for a delicate balance: It attempts to work things out so that everyone gets just enough stuff to keep them from getting violent and trying to take other people’s stuff.

Shameless plug for my website: www.nettphoto.com
User avatar
dbt1949
Posts: 25688
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 12:34 am
Location: Hogeye Arkansas

Re: Crew member fatally shot on set of Alec Baldwin movie

Post by dbt1949 »

Personally when I'm handed a gun I check to see if it's loaded even if somebody says it's not. But, that's just me.
Ye Olde Farte
Double Ought Forty
aka dbt1949
User avatar
Rumpy
Posts: 12674
Joined: Sun Mar 27, 2005 6:52 pm
Location: Sudbury, Ontario, Canada

Re: Crew member fatally shot on set of Alec Baldwin movie

Post by Rumpy »

Octavious wrote: Thu Apr 20, 2023 4:40 pm Honestly the person in charge of the weapons is the one that should be getting ripped apart.
Yeah, agreed. I'm really surprised that particular person isn't being hit with more than they've got. They made a monumental mistake that ended in a loss of life. I surely hope they don't continue in that line of work. They should not be allowed near a gun anymore.
PC:
Ryzen 5 3600
32GB RAM
2x1TB NVMe Drives
GTX 1660 Ti
User avatar
Daehawk
Posts: 63530
Joined: Sat Jan 01, 2005 1:11 am

Re: Crew member fatally shot on set of Alec Baldwin movie

Post by Daehawk »

Ummm why is the big money going to the actor's workers’ compensation insurance? Shouldn't they be the ones paying him?
--------------------------------------------
I am Dyslexic of Borg, prepare to have your ass laminated.
I guess Ray Butts has ate his last pancake.
http://steamcommunity.com/id/daehawk
"Has high IQ. Refuses to apply it"
User avatar
ImLawBoy
Forum Admin
Posts: 14950
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 9:49 pm
Location: Chicago, IL
Contact:

Re: Crew member fatally shot on set of Alec Baldwin movie

Post by ImLawBoy »

dbt1949 wrote: Thu Apr 20, 2023 4:46 pm Personally when I'm handed a gun I check to see if it's loaded even if somebody says it's not. But, that's just me.
Personally, I don't think I've ever been handed a gun (not a real one, anyway).
That's my purse! I don't know you!
User avatar
Jaymann
Posts: 19323
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2004 7:13 pm
Location: California

Re: Crew member fatally shot on set of Alec Baldwin movie

Post by Jaymann »

Image
Jaymann
]==(:::::::::::::>
Black Lives Matter
User avatar
dbt1949
Posts: 25688
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 12:34 am
Location: Hogeye Arkansas

Re: Crew member fatally shot on set of Alec Baldwin movie

Post by dbt1949 »

ImLawBoy wrote: Fri Apr 21, 2023 10:30 am
dbt1949 wrote: Thu Apr 20, 2023 4:46 pm Personally when I'm handed a gun I check to see if it's loaded even if somebody says it's not. But, that's just me.
Personally, I don't think I've ever been handed a gun (not a real one, anyway).
Army, friends, gun stores.
Ye Olde Farte
Double Ought Forty
aka dbt1949
User avatar
Max Peck
Posts: 13682
Joined: Fri Aug 05, 2005 8:09 pm
Location: Down the Rabbit-Hole

Re: Crew member fatally shot on set of Alec Baldwin movie

Post by Max Peck »

I'm also in the always-check-the-weapon camp, but I've only ever been in situations where I knew the weapon in my hands was a real firearm that might be loaded with real ammunition. That was drilled into me through firearm safety training as a teenager, and again in the armed forces.

However, I can appreciate that Baldwin was in a situation where he had a lot of different demands on his attention and had good reason to believe the people who told him that the gun was safe. He was negligent, but not necessarily criminally negligent. I have no doubt that he'll spend the rest of his life wishing that it had occurred to him to triple check for himself.
"What? What? What?" -- The 14th Doctor

It's not enough to be a good player... you also have to play well. -- Siegbert Tarrasch
User avatar
Blackhawk
Posts: 43501
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 9:48 pm
Location: Southwest Indiana

Re: Crew member fatally shot on set of Alec Baldwin movie

Post by Blackhawk »

Between working in firearms sales in the early 90s and later in armed jobs where the guns where handed out (and checked in daily), I have been handed hundreds (and have handed hundreds back.) It makes one extremely aware of muzzle discipline, and teaches one how to check very quickly whether a gun is loaded (with most guns it's possible to hand it to a person in a way that shows, 100%, that it's not loaded, although that likely wouldn't apply to a period revolver.)
(˙pǝsɹǝʌǝɹ uǝǝq sɐɥ ʎʇıʌɐɹƃ ʃɐuosɹǝd ʎW)
User avatar
Rumpy
Posts: 12674
Joined: Sun Mar 27, 2005 6:52 pm
Location: Sudbury, Ontario, Canada

Re: Crew member fatally shot on set of Alec Baldwin movie

Post by Rumpy »

Max Peck wrote: Fri Apr 21, 2023 11:55 am
However, I can appreciate that Baldwin was in a situation where he had a lot of different demands on his attention and had good reason to believe the people who told him that the gun was safe. He was negligent, but not necessarily criminally negligent. I have no doubt that he'll spend the rest of his life wishing that it had occurred to him to triple check for himself.
Yeah, I can imagine a movie set is a very busy environment with much stuff going on at all times. Everyone has their roles, and if the armourer came to him with the scene-ready gun, why would he second-guess that? He'd trusted the word of someone who's job was checking the gun and that person let him down. No doubt this is going to change the rules in the industry.
PC:
Ryzen 5 3600
32GB RAM
2x1TB NVMe Drives
GTX 1660 Ti
User avatar
Max Peck
Posts: 13682
Joined: Fri Aug 05, 2005 8:09 pm
Location: Down the Rabbit-Hole

Re: Crew member fatally shot on set of Alec Baldwin movie

Post by Max Peck »

Rumpy wrote: Fri Apr 21, 2023 1:22 pm No doubt this is going to change the rules in the industry.
My bet is that it doesn't change the rules per se, because the rules weren't followed by the armorer who allowed live ammunition to find its way onto the set and into the weapon, or by the intermediary person (assistant director?) who physically handed the gun to Baldwin and told him it was safe. The existing rules work if people follow them, which is why this sort of incident is so rare in the film industry.
"What? What? What?" -- The 14th Doctor

It's not enough to be a good player... you also have to play well. -- Siegbert Tarrasch
User avatar
gilraen
Posts: 4313
Joined: Wed Sep 04, 2013 7:45 pm
Location: Broomfield, CO

Re: Crew member fatally shot on set of Alec Baldwin movie

Post by gilraen »

They could potentially change the rules where, say, the armorer must be hired for that position exclusively, and you cannot combine their duties with anything else (like it was in this case - I forget, she was also supposed to be a propmaster or something, because the production was trying to go cheap). It's already something that respectable, experienced armorers do not ever agree to do, and you basically get a double whammy: not only are you getting someone who's desperate enough to take the job, but you are also getting someone who's inexperienced, incompetent, or both.

It's a stretch, though.
Post Reply