Alec Baldwin to be charged with involuntary manslaughter

[missy]

Little kids use guns in films. Are they supposed to take responsibility for the firearm, check it's not loaded, etc?

People point guns at the camera in films. The usual rules of firearm use (in terms of never point at anyone etc) don't apply.

Nope. The usual rules ALWAYS apply when it comes to guns. These are guns we’re talking about.

First rule: never point a loaded gun at anyone
Second rule: assume all guns are loaded til proven otherwise
Third rule: check and double check the gun you’re about to point at another person is NOT loaded

 

[Lookinagain]

Again he was not just an actor. He was producer on the set. It *was* his responsibility as well.

which I believe I noted in one or two of my points above. Most of my discussion was about the duty of the actor. Not the producer. So we can agree to disagree on the actors duty.

 

[Calliecake]

One would have thought that all filming rules would have been changed to not allow real guns on set after Brandon Lee died the same way in 1993. Hopefully the rules will be changed after this latest awful accident.

 

[Ionysis]

Of course, if you are handling a "loaded gun". We are viewing this differently though. He was told the gun was safe because he was told it was "cold". This was a movie set and the part called for him to shoot, which he did while rehearsing. The question is whose responsibility it was to make sure the "bullets" were blanks and that seems to be where opinions differ. I'm just not sure it's the actors fault when there are people on set who are supposed to be doing that. It will be an interesting question for the jury assuming it's a jury trial.

No.

These are the rules for handling ANY gun. At any point. Because unless you have literally just checked the barrel and haven’t let it out of your sight you cannot be sure it’s not loaded.

The protocols on set are clear. Armourer checks the gun to see if it’s cold, actor checks to see if it’s cold. It’s a basic “maker / checker” principle that applies in all operational risk management scenarios. Baldwin didn’t check. He should have.

 

[Ionysis]

which I believe I noted in one or two of my points above. Most of my discussion was about the duty of the actor. Not the producer. So we can agree to disagree on the actors duty.

The actors duty is also clear in set safety protocols. This is standard.

 

[CalliopeCladdagh]

Nope. The usual rules ALWAYS apply when it comes to guns. These are guns we’re talking about.

First rule: never point a loaded gun at anyone
Second rule: assume all guns are loaded til proven otherwise
Third rule: check and double check the gun you’re about to point at another person is NOT loaded

So if the gun in this picture had been loaded by an irresponsible adult off set, given to the child model/actor to use and something had happened, you'd charge the child with manslaughter?

 

[Ionysis]

So if the gun in this picture had been loaded by an irresponsible adult off set, given to the child model/actor to use and something had happened, you'd charge the child with manslaughter?

You’re comparing apples and oranges. The protocols would be different where a responsible adult would need to be the second checker - a child clearly can’t carry adult accountabilities otherwise all children would be tried as adults in court. This is a really stupid argument frankly.

HOWEVER I would, if I was a responsible adult, be taking that opportunity to educate the child about gun safety and encouraging them to always be aware if the rules and how to safely handle firearms.

 

[missy]

So if the gun in this picture had been loaded by an irresponsible adult off set, given to the child model/actor to use and something had happened, you'd charge the child with manslaughter?

Not a valid comparison.

You’re comparing apples and oranges. The protocols would be different where a responsible adult would need to be the second checker - a child clearly can’t carry adult accountabilities otherwise all children would be tried as adults in court. This is a really stupid argument frankly.

HOWEVER I would, if I was a responsible adult, be taking that opportunity to educate the child about gun safety and encouraging them to always be aware if the rules and how to safely handle firearms.

Exactly. But be careful in this thread. Some don't like the interjection of logic and common sense.

 

[missy]

Mr Baldwin has shown poor judgment and continues to show poor judgment.
"He didn’t help himself at all for his case by going in the press, in the media and doing all these interviews. . You just never do interviews when you’re under investigation."

Unfortunately this is not surprising. If you knew the background perhaps you'd think about this differently. Perhaps those who are commenting vehemently defending Mr Baldwin would like to read about the unsafe conditions that were occurring on set. As I suspect it was money over safety. IMO
Sharing the highlights for anyone who might be interested.

From the NYT and from Fox News.



"Before the tragedy, problems were brewing behind the scenes. Hours before Baldwin fired the fatal gunshot, a camera crew for the movie walked out to protest conditions and production issues that included safety concerns."

"The crew members had expressed their discontent with matters that ranged from safety procedures"

"A crew member who was alarmed by the misfires told a unit production manager in a text message, "We’ve now had 3 accidental discharges. This is super unsafe," according to a copy of the message reviewed by the newspaper. The New York Times also reported that there were at least two earlier accidental gun discharges; it cited three former crew members."


"When the camera crew walked out, that should have been the end of it until everything was resolved," said Papritz. "But what do they do? They bring in non-union people. And that just shows you where their heads were at. It was money over safety."

"To get in the union, you have to work hard. You have to make your bones in the industry. You start at the bottom and work your way up. And the differences are extreme. You have to follow the rules of safety at all times and you have to make sure you’re properly compensated and get paid on time. There are penalties for the producer or production manager if they don’t follow the union rules. The rules can’t be made up as you go along. And a camera crew walking off a shoot is just unheard of. That’s beyond a red flag. That’s a bonfire."

"Sometimes the crew and production are encouraged to “speed things up” for any number of reasons which can sometimes lead to “relaxed” safety protocols."

“He has an absolute duty to know that what is in the gun that is being placed in his hand is safe.
Hannah Gutierrez-Reed, who was in charge of weapons on set as the movie’s armorer and who will also be charged with involuntary manslaughter, also had that responsibility"

There were supposed to be multiple levels of safety checks in place. Unfortunately these two, IMO, did NOT do their job and Halyna Hutchins is dead because of this. This was an egregious, reckless error. Due to very poor judgement and not taking appropriate safety measures. This was a tragedy that could have been easily avoided if they had both been doing their job. If Mr Baldwin hadn't cut corners to make money and if he hadn't put money over the lives of others, IMO

"
What reasons are prosecutors giving to support issuing this charge related to Baldwin’s role as a producer?

They’re saying that because he’s a producer, he’s in charge of the production, of set safety, of making sure that there’s enough personnel to be able to govern safety, [that] there’s no shortcuts in spending and corners cut, things like that. I’ll equate it to a premises liability type of situation, just that he was in charge of set safety.

"

We can continue going in circles about this but it comes down to that no one should ever die on a film production. Not from a completely preventable fatal error when there are safety measures in place.

 

[ItsMainelyYou]

https://www.cnn.com/2023/01/19/entertainment/rust-movie-shooting-alec-baldwin-charges-decision/index.html

The family said they’re pleased that Alec Baldwin and Hannah Gutierrez Reed were charged. Despite reaching a settlement with Alec Baldwin. They want justice. I don’t blame them.

And no matter what anyone here thinks he did have a responsibility as producer. Read the article if you’re interested. Seems the set was not safe as reported by others on set. IIRC I think the words “Wild West “ were used.

You never point a loaded gun at anyone unless you intend to shoot. Or are reckless and ignorant. He had the gun in his hand. He pointed the gun. He should have made sure the gun had no bullets.

I was talking to my DH, who in the long ago was(is) a Marine and this is where he finds fault for Alec. Alec was a producer, and in that capacity does have a measure of executive control over the units. The armorer is truly at fault here, but Alec gave permission for the conditions that would allow this to happen.

Props are used in many movies by countless actors, they cannot be responsible for the safety of the weapon as it is not their expertise and is given to them as a prop, or NOT useable. This would absolve an actor of responsibility in that case.

The previous armorers who was doing their job appropriately were fired as a cost cutting measure and the new, second armorer lacked the experience necessary to be doing the job on their own. Who fired the experienced unit? The Producers.
Who is Alec Baldwin? An actor and Producer on this film. Clear operational negligence.

From what I remember, the second armorer was using these guns recreationally for target practice on location. With live ammo. Which means there was live ammo on set. There is never a call for this. No competent armorer would do this. The 'new' armorer should have been fired immediately. This was a producer's call. It was partly Alec's call. He chose to be negligent. The armorer's entire job revolves around safety and maintenance of the firearm, and it is their responsibility to make sure the guns are 'cold' and in safe working order for the layperson actor to use as a prop- in which case there should have been redundant layers of safety already in place to ensure it was safe before it ever reached an actor's hand.

 

[missy]

I was talking to my DH, who in the long ago was(is) a Marine finds fault for Alec. Alec was a producer, and in that capacity does have a measure of executive control over the units. The armorer is truly at fault here, but Alec gave permission for the conditions that would allow this to happen.

Props are used in many movies by countless actors, they cannot be responsible for the safety of the weapon as it is not their expertise and is given to them as a prop, or NOT useable. This would absolve an actor of responsibility in that case.

The previous armorers who was doing their job appropriately were fired as a cost cutting measure and the new, second armorer lacked the experience necessary to be doing the job on their own. Who fired the experienced unit? The Producers.
Who is Alec Baldwin? An actor and Producer on this film. Clear operational negligence.

From what I remember, the second armorer was using these guns recreationally for target practice on location. With live ammo. Which means there was live ammo on set. There is never a call for this. No competent armorer would do this. The 'new' armorer should have been fired immediately. This was a producer's call. It was partly Alec's call. He chose to be negligent. The armorer's entire job revolves around safety and maintenance of the firearm, and it is their responsibility to make sure the guns are 'cold' and in safe working order for the layperson actor to use as a prop- in which case there should have been redundant layers of safety already in place to ensure it was safe before it ever reached an actors hand.

Agreed. I do think ultimately he will be acquitted or plead out. But hopefully this will produce real changes in the safety conditions on set.

 

[ItsMainelyYou]

Agreed. I do think ultimately he will be acquitted or plead out. But hopefully this will produce real changes in the safety conditions on set.

It should NEVER have happened. This was a cascade of negligence that built to the outcome. The underlying issue is how it got to the point of units and other professionals strike walking off set because they had no other options!
The first instance of safety concerns should have been immediately addressed and rectified or you shut down production.
End of.
I wonder if there will be permanent change to the executive power privilege of producers to withhold funds and ignore industry standard safety with what looks like (in this case) partial impunity. The entire producing unit, the studio, all of them, should share in blame and recourse for this. They all contributed to the death of an innocent person and the wounding of others. It's unconscionable.

 

[missy]

It should NEVER have happened. This was a cascade of negligence that built to the outcome. The underlying issue is how it got to the point of units and other professionals strike walking off set because they had no other options!
The first instance of safety concerns should have been immediately addressed and rectified or you shut down production.
End of.
I wonder if there will be permanent change to the executive power privilege of producers to withhold funds and ignore industry standard safety with what looks like (in this case) partial impunity. The entire producing unit, the studio, all of them, should share in blame and recourse for this. They all contributed to the death of an innocent person and the wounding of others. It's unconscionable.

Yup. And I am bewildered with those who do not at least consider him partially responsible. Given what we do know, it was, IMO, reckless endangerment of others. And so easily preventable. Unconscionable indeed. :/

 

[adlgel]

Is Alec the ONLY producer associated with this movie? If no, shouldn't the other producers also be charged? And as an actor if I did check to see if the gun was loaded would I be able to tell the difference between a real bullet and a blank or would I have to remove all of the ammo to tell that?

Also read this: "Baldwin has some support from his fellow actors. Douglas Stewart, who shot a scene for "Rust," says in all of his experience in show business, actors have never been the ones to inspect the chamber of a gun. In fact, he says it's routinely prohibited ... and the actor's union has co-signed on that procedure."

 

[missy]

Is Alec the ONLY producer associated with this movie? If no, shouldn't the other producers also be charged? And as an actor if I did check to see if the gun was loaded would I be able to tell the difference between a real bullet and a blank or would I have to remove all of the ammo to tell that?

Why Alec Baldwin was charged over 'Rust' shooting, according to Santa Fe district attorney

Here's why the New Mexico first judicial district attorney decided to file charges.

www.kcra.com

Snip...

"​

​

'An actor does not get a free pass'​

Other actors — including "A-list" celebrities — consulted by prosecutors said they "always check their guns or have someone check it in front of them," Carmack-Altwies told CNN shortly after announcing her intention to file involuntary manslaughter charges.
"Every person that handles a gun has a duty to make sure that if they're going to handle that gun, point it at someone and pull the trigger, that it is not going to fire a projectile and kill someone," she said.

She added, "An actor does not get a free pass just because they are an actor. That is what is so important. We are saying here in New Mexico, that everyone is equal under the law."

"

 

[ItsMainelyYou]

Is Alec the ONLY producer associated with this movie? If no, shouldn't the other producers also be charged? And as an actor if I did check to see if the gun was loaded would I be able to tell the difference between a real bullet and a blank or would I have to remove all of the ammo to tell that?

Also read this: "Baldwin has some support from his fellow actors. Douglas Stewart, who shot a scene for "Rust," says in all of his experience in show business, actors have never been the ones to inspect the chamber of a gun. In fact, he says it's routinely prohibited ... and the actor's union has co-signed on that procedure."

No, he isn't. You would think. They all need to be held accountable in my opinion. It was their collective cost cutting and disregard for safe practices that led to this tragedy. Unless Alec had override on all funding decisions(which he wouldn't) he is not the only one to blame. There was an experienced team, initially.

Blanks have a telltale dimpling on the top of the cartridge where the bullet itself would rest. They still have gunpowder.
Someone with no experience isn't going to know what they're looking at. I'm not blaming an actor for this. Armorers are there for a reason. This is their expertise and responsibility. This is precisely what they're paid to prevent.
I am blaming a producer who knowingly got rid the very experts put into place to prevent this and putting someone incompetent in their place, then used a dangerous weapon as an actor and 'hoped for the best'.
He had the agency to ensure safety as one of the producers.

Prop guns firing blanks are still dangerous.
They are also obsolete. There is just no need.

Alec Baldwin: What are prop guns and why are they dangerous?

An incident involving US actor Alec Baldwin puts the spotlight on an item often used on film sets.

www.bbc.com

 

[Karl_K]

HOWEVER I would, if I was a responsible adult, be taking that opportunity to educate the child about gun safety and encouraging them to always be aware if the rules and how to safely handle firearms.

To many years ago to think about, I shot with and helped train kids as young as 6 at the range.
They were required to meet the same standards for safety as the adults and did.
The kids with a few exceptions who were not ready for the responsibility were safer than a lot of the adults.
It was not really age based either one kid could be safe at 6 and another age 10 that was not ready for the responsibility.
The all received training on safety.


As far as the charges they are lighter than I think would be justice but may have been as harsh as they could go according to the law in that area.

 

[momofive]

To many years ago to think about, I shot with and helped train kids as young as 6 at the range.
They were required to meet the same standards for safety as the adults and did.
The kids with a few exceptions who were not ready for the responsibility were safer than a lot of the adults.
It was not really age based either one kid could be safe at 6 and another age 10 that was not ready for the responsibility.
The all received training on safety.


As far as the charges they are lighter than I think would be justice but may have been as harsh as they could go according to the law in that area.

HIs defense that it wasn't his responsibility to know the gun was loaded with a live round is not a defense. Before you point any gun at anyone, you need to be 1000% sure that gun is either not loaded or that ALL the rounds are dummies. It is his responsibility, he was lazy and just relied on his armorer. Hopefully, the one good thing to come out of this is that going forward, film production companies will make sure they are not lax in their responsibilities.

 

[Karl_K]

HIs defense that it wasn't his responsibility to know the gun was loaded with a live round is not a defense.

I agree. You touch the trigger your the one responsible.
Even if one accepts that he wasn't, he is still responsible as the one being in charge.

 

[kenny]

I agree. You touch the trigger your the one responsible.
Even if one accepts that he wasn't, he is still responsible as the one being in charge.

I'm not taking sides on this, as I see good reasoning on both sides.
As always, we're all entitled to our own opinions, but this one is complicated, nuanced, important, and quite controversial.

That's why lawyers, judge and jury will make this call, in court.

 

[Ionysis]

I'm not taking sides on this, as I see good reasoning on both sides.
As always, we're all entitled to our own opinions, but this one is quite controversial.

That's why lawyers, judge and jury will make this call, in court.

Agree. That’s why I am not sorry to see the charge made. I do think the correct outcome is that all the arguments and mitigations will then be properly aired and debated, in the context of the law, and a thoroughly investigated conclusion reached. Frankly that must be better for the family, Baldwin himself, and the industry than trial by media. And is more likely to result in long term changes being made to avoid these tragic incidents going forward.

 

[Daisys and Diamonds]

something that was drilled into us in the army
never ever point a firearm, real or imitation, loaded or not, at anyone (unless it was an actual war situation)

 

[kenny]

Besides all the media coverage and the 168 released police videos, I can think of a couple things that may influence the trial's verdict.

1. The trial will be selecting from a jury pool in a fairly anti-gun Los Angeles county, kinda the opposite of the bible belt.
2. Baldwin has gobs of money to get the best lawyers.

 

[tyty333]

Besides all the media coverage and the 168 released police videos, I can think of a couple things that may influence the trial's verdict.

1. The trial will be selecting from a jury pool in a fairly anti-gun Los Angeles county, kinda the opposite of the bible belt.
2. Baldwin has gobs of money to get the best lawyers.

Why will the jury be selected from LA county? From what I saw the Santa Fe, NM prosecutors have charged him. Why wouldn't
the jury be from Santa Fe area? Prejudice?

 

[Lookinagain]

Why will the jury be selected from LA county? From what I saw the Santa Fe, NM prosecutors have charged him. Why wouldn't
the jury be from Santa Fe area? Prejudice?

Well, unless he can get it moved, which is unlikely, it will be in New Mexico where charges were brought. It's also possible he will waive a jury trial, I guess, assuming that is allowed in New Mexico for a criminal case.

 

[kenny]

My apologies.
I must have brain freeze, assuming the trial would be in LA.

Ignore me.

 

[missy]

Prosecutors deny claim by Alec Baldwin's lawyers that authorities destroyed gun in 'Rust' movie set shooting

Alec Baldwin is charged with two counts of manslaughter in the death of "Rust" cinematographer Halyna Hutchins.

www.cnbc.com

​

 

[missy]

Alec Baldwin indicted by grand jury for involuntary manslaughter over deadly 'Rust' shooting

A grand jury has indicted Alec Baldwin on an involuntary manslaughter charge in the "Rust" on-set shooting.

abcnews.go.com

https://www.npr.org/2024/01/20/1225789130/grand-jury-indictment-against-alec-baldwin-opens-two-paths-for-prosecutors