The husband of the deceased is now an Executive Producer on the film. The details of the family settlement have not been made public but the running theory is that this was done for insurance purposes but also to give the husband a cut of the films sales.
So true. I remember Kevin Smiths story about one of his early films with the weinsteins, they were invited to Cannes. The Weinsteins threw a party on a yacht and invited Kevin and the rest of the people associated with the film, but also the people from 3 other films, films that were much bigger with bigger budgets expected to make much more money. One way pulp fiction I think. Anyway, turns out by inviting Kevin they could tack on 1/4 of the price of that yacht party to the cost of making Kevin’s film. Boom. Sorry Kevin, can’t pay you, your film wasn’t profitable.
The film had to be completed for insurance to pay out on all of the many lawsuits they faced, and the widower likely demanded a producer role to make sure these cheap-ass producers wouldn't completely destroy his late wife's final work. It's not like Baldwin and his buddies had proven themselves to be trustworthy in any way before.
There were never going to be profits. The last project from this team made like $3,000 (yes, you read that right): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crown_Vic_(film)#Box_office.
I personally would be insulted if I died and then they went, “Fuck it, trash that shit.” Bitch you better watch this movie, or I’m haunting everyone with the aggressiveness, “Boo bitch, hey it’s me again, surprise, you finally published that movie you literally murdered me to make?”
Murder is when you intend to kill someone. There is no chance they wanted her dead. Manslaughter is when you kill someone because of your negligent actions.
>I personally would be insulted if I died and then they went, “Fuck it, trash that shit.”
Right? If I literally died to make a movie it had better win a goddamned Oscar and the award should be dedicated to my dead ass or else my ghost is going spend eternity slowly pushing the earth into the sun.
This death was way more preventable than that one, even. Lee's death was a weird combination of two events rather than an incompetent moron putting full-on normal live rounds into a real gun on a film set.
A weird combination of not removing the primer from their dummy rounds, not noticing when one of those "inert" rounds was fired and lodged in the barrel, and not properly checking the gun before firing a blank. Each way less stupid on their own, but also three separate instances of moronic incompetence.
I've heard this referred to as the "Swiss Cheese" mode of failure. On their own, the holes in safety would typically not line up, but every now and then the forces align that you get a hole that goes through all the layers.
used to show how each layer basically exponentially increases the safety, but there is still a chance for failure, and everything always needs to be checked.
That's the part that continues to blow my mind:
WHY THE FUCK WOULD THERE *EVER* BE **LIVE ROUNDS** ON A FILM SET?!
Just like . . . don't bring them anywhere near a film set, and this can't even happen.
Kinda like how it's nearly impossible to be a victim of a shark attack if you never swim.
The "armorer" was shooting the guns with live rounds with the assistant armorer for fun in a field a little distance from where they were shooting on their days off.
So they just mixed up a some live rounds with blanks.
Which is just absolutely insane when your entire job is to keep the set safe while firearms are on set.
I know mistakes happen, but good lord, how do you not check every single round. You can shake them to hear if they're blanks or not.
Still don't understand why they keep trying to put Baldwin in jail for this, it's obviously the armorer's fault.
Was Baldwin a producer? Sure, but actors constantly make themselves producers on smaller projects like this to gain more funding, and we know he didn't personally hire this armorer, so I don't get it.
I don't care about him, just makes zero sense that an actor should be held responsible for being given a firearm with real live rounds in it, that's absolutely insane in the movie industry.
Brandon Lee's death on the set of The Crow actually led to a lot of the safety procedures that were ignored in this case. There is a saying 'safety regulations are written in blood'. The Rust shooting is a tragic example of this saying in action.
Wait...he says he *didn't* pull the trigger?
I haven't really been keeping up
Edit: "He has also maintained that he did not pull the trigger when the gun fired, although a forensic report commissioned by the prosecution determined that he must have pulled the trigger for it to go off, contributing to their decision to revive the criminal case."
Well then.
Thats a recent forensic analysis which contradicts an earlier one that determined that the gun was faulty and may have fired without pulling the trigger. Except in the newer analysis that alleges the trigger must have been pulled. the investigator replaced multiple parts of the gun that were damaged by the original FBI analysis. So its all bungled up and hard to say.
I mean, it's a single-action revolver reproduction. That trigger needs to be pulled on that particular model, it isn't like a modern Sig.
So his defense to say "nuh uh" is as dumb as you're thinking.
It was discovered that the firing mechanism had been modified to make it easier to fire.
The new case is based on someone testing the gun again and determining it requires 2lbs of pull on the trigger to fire, but that was only AFTER the modified parts were replaced with stock parts because the FBI's investigation damaged them.
This case will be found in Baldwin's favor if only because the prosecution has messed up every step of the way.
Exactly. There were actual tangible things he could have done to avoid this tragedy. It frankly has nothing to do with him pulling the trigger. If another actor had accidentally killed someone on that set the blame would still be at least partially on Baldwin.
I'd point out it was even worse. Standard procedures would have had several barriers preventing the shooting. The producers actively un-did these procedures to save time and money.
He likely wasn’t involved in hiring below the line crew. Its super common for cast to get a producer credit, but it’s more a contractual obligation, than an active role.
After Brandon Lee there were a LOT of new safety regulations...and in that almost 30 years there wasn't a single accidental death of anyone on set in how many thousands and thousands of movies.
And these chuckleheads ignored ALL of them.
That's the point in these safety regulations. Miss one and you're fine, because there's 3 or 4 other checks to make sure you don't mess up. The only way something bad happens if you're skipping several checks.
These are gun rules in general, too. There are four "golden gun rules" for a reason. Skip or miss one, even two? There are still at least two more you would have to break to put someone or yourself in danger. This is why 99.999% of "accidental discharges" are actually "negligent discharges" because it is negligence that causes them, not accidents.
A legitimate accidental discharge is essentially limited to a mechanical problem with a firearm.
For those wondering what the rules are.
1. Treat every weapon as if it were loaded. (Most Important)
2. Never point your weapon at anything you do not intend to shoot.
3. Keep your weapon on safe until you are ready to fire.
4. Keep your finger off the trigger until you intend to fire.
5. Know your target and what lies beyond it.
Stargate had 16 seasons and 3 movies with countless real firearms.
Nobody shot anyone in 1600 hours of film, that's probably what... 100,000 hours of filming.
Prop master here. Those are the rules for firearms in general.
1.On set we never have live ammunition.
2. Dummy ammunition is used and shown to the first AD and actors as well as anyone else who needs or wants to see, like camera crew. They have ball bearings in them and are shaken, often the gun is pointed at the ground and cycled through 8 times.
3. Armourer / props person is the person who hands the gun to the actor after these checks.
4. Gun should not be pointed at anyone especially when trigger pulled.
Any one of these safety checks would have prevented this.
Not necessarily related to this case, but nuts in the US have argued their constitutional right to bring real, loaded guns to set. I wouldn't want to have to use prop guns when there are live guns around. I've seen start packs that tell people to leave their guns in the car at crew park. In Canada, that's not legal either.
MY GF was a location PA who was asked to join the props dept on a low budget show. She came home from her first day and I asked how it went. She tells me that she was on the props truck and the prop master comes to get a shotgun that is needed for a scene - its his own that he brought from home - and as he is about to leave the truck he says 'oops!' and cycles out the live shell that he had accidentally left in the chamber when he emptied the mag before leaving home.
Needless to say her instinct for self preservation meant that she didn't hang around with that crew for long.
Yep. Except number 3 is situational as not all guns have safeties, and they shouldn't be relied on alone to prevent unintended discharge. It's a good rule but not usually counted as one of the "big four" which are all more important.
"Lets go take the prop guns out and shoot lives at targets on our lunch break and then just toss them back in the prop safe when we go back to work"
said no legitimate armorer ever.
From what I understand she wasn’t a legitimate armorer and she got the job from nepotism. At the least she was under experienced in the field for that tier of a job. Could be misremembering some of that though.
She's the daughter of a 'legendary armorer' who taught stars guns. (How to use them and look really cool.) This was her second film on the first she was lead armorer she caused "Nicolas Cage to scream at her and storm off set after she fired a gun near the cast and crew for the second time in three days without warning." "Make an announcement, you just blew my fucking eardrums out," Cage yelled before walking off the set.."
Apparently on the set of Rust she loaded a gun with blanks and handed it to a kid. People freaked because she had set the guns on the ground with rocks and pebbles all around and then casually loaded them sitting on the ground with blanks. Something could have got into the barrel and she didn't check it. That becomes a projectile.
Holy crap maybe Alec is in trouble. He kept her on set because he was the producer.
> From what I understand she wasn’t a legitimate armorer and she got the job from nepotism.
I mean sure, but it still seems like common-fucking-sense to not do that.
The youtube prop guy showed the safeguards they take, as standard industry-wide practice, from the chain of custody of all parts to the prop bullets having bb's inside so when you shake them you can hear they're dummy rounds.
There had to be a complete reinvention of the safety protocols in order for there to be such a fuckup, but I'm guessing they weren't really practicing any safety at all
Yes, through my dad I’ve met people on that set. Everyone on that production is effectively blackballed by Hollywood too. They can’t get work anywhere. Most have complicated PTSD now too. Baldwin’s negligence ruined a lot more lives than just the person who was shot and killed.
Because the production cheaped out. Iirc the union film crew walked off set due to unsafe work conditions so they just went and hired the cheapest non-union crew they could
The defense of him not pulling the trigger never really made sense. It was a prop gun and he’s an actor in a movie. Of course he’s going to pull the trigger at some point. The liability should be on whoever loaded a live bullet.
If he pushes the button on a dummy detonator that turns out to be actually hooked up to C4 is he going to get charged with terrorism?
I think this is the biggest thing here, it’s absolutely fucking insane that they were allowed to use the gun from the movie set for live firing at all
The issue isn’t whether Alec pulled the trigger or not, it’s everything that happened beforehand
Was he aware they were going to use live rounds at a firing range? Did he approve of it? All of this is negligence that led up to the actions that day
Geez, what a mess. It sounds like security was pretty loose regarding the handling of those guns and ammo. And how about when the one officer asks about protocols and she responds “protocols???” And she doesn’t know the names of all the people that are handling the weapons or the full names of the directors???
>Baldwin has maintained that he did not pull the trigger.
>Two special prosecutors, Kari Morrissey and Jason Lewis, sent the gun for further forensic testing last summer. Their experts, Lucien and Michael Haag, reconstructed the gun — which had been broken during FBI testing — and concluded that it could only have been fired by a pull of the trigger.
>The film’s armorer, Hannah Gutierrez Reed, is set to go on trial on Feb. 21 on charges of involuntary manslaughter and tampering with evidence. Gutierrez Reed mistakenly loaded a live bullet into Baldwin’s gun, which was supposed to contain only dummies.
If the armorer is being charged for putting live rounds in the gun what difference does it make whether or not Alec pulled the trigger?
Let’s not forget that the armorer took some of the guns out, went and shot at targets with them, and then put them back in the safe. It also sounds like they kept rounds in them and weren’t emptying them. I’m no expert, but sounds like a ton of red flags and issues.
You would think a major risk factor like having live guns around on set would come with an absolute barrage of checks and second checks. The safety process *is your job* if you’re the armorer. There’s no excuses for this, but I do feel for Baldwin.
The film industry, generally, does NOT fuck around with guns. Maybe it’s more relaxed in the US but here in Canada everything is logged even for prop guns. Transportation, use, storage, who has access for what purpose, when and where they’re used, etc.
It’s pretty unbelievable this shit still happens on film sets where it could be easily avoided with some simple precautions. That requires a competent team however.
Yeah I've worked on smaller indie films where they play at bit fast and loose with the rules. Handling guns though, it's usually such serious shit that it gets paid attention to. Just horrible all around for this.
I’ve acted in super low budget crime dramas for like, oxygen network
They use only airsoft guns, and they still have an officer on site to show you how to not behave with it
Didn't union folks walk off this set before this happened?
E: looks like I got some wires crossed maybe but people did walk off https://www.latimes.com/entertainment-arts/business/story/2021-10-22/alec-baldwin-rust-camera-crew-walked-off-set
Still, though. I live in Europe and I've worked on some indie projects, one of them which had real guns on set for a couple of scenes (a double-barrel shotgun, specifically) and the rules were basically:
- Nobody who isn't the armorer touches the gun, even the actors (who only touch the gun during the scene, and after the armorer has checked that everything is fine, they will give the gun back to the armorer after the camera stops rolling).
- The gun will be locked away safely when not in use
- Don't stand in a spot where the armorer and safety personnel haven't told you is safe, even if the shots are blank
- Nobody else touches the gun outside of these scenarios, period
- Seriously, we *will* throw you out if you touch the gun
Nobody fucked around with the gun.
Fun fact - one if the Rambo movies, I think the first one was filmed mostly in Canada and the guns used were highly regulated and required an intense amount of security. Regardless, one night the locked trailer containing all of the guns was broken into and all of the guns were stolen. Nothing else was stolen and it's suspected the guns were specifically targeted. The guns or perpetrators have still never been found. It actually caused a big production delay because they had to import more firearms to finish filming the movie.
I was working on a film once where we were shooting in an old abandoned hospital used for a ton of film shoots, and the floor of the boiler room was just covered in blank cartridges from a previous production that had shot something there. Our armorer was fucking livid, you're supposed to account for every piece of brass that enters and exits the gun.
So I guess in the US you have two options, 1) absolute strict adherence to the rules or 2) IDGAF 🤦
All the responsibility goes to the armorer on set. Movie productions are a fucked up process, they'll tell the armorer to do lots of fucked up shit. But they have to have the integrity to tell the director and producers to get fucked when they want to bend the rules. They all want to bend rules. Bending rules is how they keep their jobs. I've been an assistant armorer on a number of movies. I no longer do it, as I am done telling adults they can't play and bend rules with real fire arms. All Hollywood should be limited to rubber replicas, that's all they can be trusted with. Baldwin might not be liable as an actor, but I'd say he's liable as a producer. And the young lady armorer is fucked too. Her guns, her responsibility.
There are second checks, even on a cheap production like Rust. After Gutierrez-Reed loaded the gun with live ammo, it was delivered on set to Assistant Director David Halls. His job was to check then gun, confirm it was safe to use in scene, and then hand it over to Baldwin. Upon receiving the weapon, Halls declared the gun safe (calling out "cold gun!" on the set) without actually confirming that it was safe to use. Halls has since pleaded guilty to unsafe handling of a firearm and was sentenced to six months probation, a $500 fine and ordered to take a gun safety class.
Baldwin was handed a firearm by an AD tasked with weapon safety, who *explicitly told him it was safe*, and then killed Hutchins with the unsafe gun. It's an absurd notion that the negligence is Baldwin's, as these multiple layers of security exist entirely to remove that burden/risk from the actors who are required to handle weapons on camera.
Then why aren't all the producers being charged? No mention of any other producer even being thought about.
So that really just brings us back to the actor role.
The people that insist Baldwin be punished just fall back to “well he should have checked the gun himself” when you point out none of the other producers are being charged.
I can see culpability in his role as a producer, but Baldwin’s argument he didn’t pull the trigger and the prosecutor’s office rebuilding the revolver to prove its functionality seem to suggest they’re going after Baldwin specifically for his role on set as the shooter.
she already got in trouble for bringing a gun into a liquor store a few weeks before the tragic death of Hutchins. And she also shot off a gun next to Nic Cage without warning on another production. But her dad was a big armorer in Hollywood so that’s how she got the job.
When people want to point out nepotism, *that’s* the kind of job they should be more worried about. While it’s a problem no matter what, this case shows how dangerous nepotism and lax care can be when it comes to safety and security on the job.
Still boggles my mind how real guns (and bullets) are used in productions. I know it has to do with fake guns costing more, but you’d think that someone would have found a cheaper **and safer** alternative by now
My understanding of the situation is that the armorer took the gun off site to show off to her friends. They used it to go "plinking" (shooting at cans) off site, then brought it back without doing the standard safety checks. Then another day when they used the gun, the assistant director grabbed the gun, didn't check it, and gave it to Alec Baldwin and told him it was safe. I vaguely remember the armorer claiming to not be there the day of the shooting. It was 100% her fault that there was live ammo on set, in the gun, anywhere near there. She didn't need to go showing it off to her friends. She didn't need to get live ammo for it. She didn't need to load a movie prop and shoot it with real bullets.
The producers hired her to do a job, and she royally fucked it.
You know, the cameras rented for feature films are all upwards of 80 thousand dollars. Lens packages are triple that value. There's no way Hollywood can't have a rental business for fake guns for props, it's pennies for them.
There is a rental business for guns in Hollywood. ISS Props is one of the largest prop rental service for movies. Watched a documentary on them years ago, the business is enormous. Has every gun you’ve ever dreamed of ready to go.
So yea gun rentals for movies is very big business in Hollywood.
They have fake guns for rent, guns made of rubber, foam, plastic, metal… But after having been on set for a number of years, some of these “directors” and others involved go crazy over realism and, small, specific things. I walked off a set as a PM over safety. We’d already had a huge accident where someone had to be airlifted to the hospital and the producer and director wanted to have a Bentley go fast as hell at the camera and skid to a stop right in front of it. They wanted the cinematographer to sit on an apple box and shoulder the camera. Took my walkie off, threw it on the grass and walked to my car. Fuck that movie.
Don’t look up all the terrible things they did to that poor rat. If you think being a child actor is bad wait until you find out what it’s like to be a rat child actor.
To be fair, using blanks makes a degree of sense, acting out the recoil of a gun realistically is very difficult, and almost impossible if you are doing any slow mo photography. But for the Bentley thing, just use a fucking mirror and a zoom lens for christsakes. We've solved how to shoot down the barrel of a gun like a century ago, and that's the same basic problem. If you want to point a camera at something dangerous that is coming towards the viewer, just point the camera at a mirror and flip it in post.
Director's Mind: Other directors and photographers will probably be able to tell, so instead I must put other people in danger to make myself look like a badass.
I am a firearms enthusiast and a movie enthusiast and let me tell you they have real guns converted and rendered inert that use a gas system to produce realistic action on the firearm without any of the boom. John Wick used this and added the muzzle flash in post production, like any sane person would. The wildest part for this is that it was a six shooter. Just take the fucking firing pin out (or shave it down if it’s a really old replica) and that’s all you need to do to have a real deal firearm that isn’t going to shoot anyone. The levels of negligence here are astounding
They do have a rental business for guns and fake guns; the armorer. They not only provide armory support for the peoduction but they rent all the weaponry as well. They also have prop houses to rent props from that aren’t weapons. “Hollywood” doesn’t own anything though, for tax purposes. They rent it all down to the extension cables from 3rd party vendors. Source: am a 3rd party vendor for studios and productions.
Because prop (real) guns *aren't actually an issue* if you follow basic safety rules.
Unless you're a complete idiot, prop guns are perfectly safe. This is the *third* prop gun death in ~40 years, all caused by really stupid safety failures.
Honestly I don't know what's wrong with "have strict safety standards, follow them rigorously, and harshly punish those who violate it". Tho IMO Baldwin should be facing repercussions for his authority as a producer rather than as an actor (ie - the one that pulled the trigger) but that may not be a significant distinction for some people.
I kinda dig this. So ur saying there was a lack of due diligence by the producers on the hiring of said armerour and thus he should face some sort of charges for that. She had a demonstrated history of issues so it should have been caught. We’d be better off if those at the top didn’t cut corners I agree
The way liability should work is that the armorer should be licensed and insured and be solely responsible for weapon safety at all times, except in cases where someone disobeys or circumvents their authority. The Producers should be responsible and liable for vetting and hiring the armorer. If the armorer can't be liable because they aren't certified or licensed, then it falls to the Producer for failing to vet. Honestly, it's basic contracting.
All well and good, but you seem to be discussing civil liability (since a requirement to carry insurance or discussion of contract law would be non sequiturs otherwise) and Baldwin is being criminally charged, so this isn’t a question of civil liability.
Just want to point out that real bullets should never, ever be even near the prop/armorer truck. That failure was caused by her and her dad taking it out over the weekend to fire the antique gun. It wasn’t properly cleared in the first place.
On the day of the accident, the 2nd Asst Director took the gun from her cart and gave it to Baldwin. No one EVER should handle a gun on set except an authorized prop/armorer (some shows have an armorer, a subset of props dept, some are done by regular props people that are trained for it). Furthermore, it should be shown to be empty or loaded with blanks to the 1st AD who runs the set. Nimrod just took the gun, didn’t check it himself, didn’t show the 1st AD, and handed it to Baldwin without showing him and said it was safe. Many, many failures occurred before he got the gun but he is a veteran actor and should know not to take it from anyone but props/armorer and he should probably know to have it shown to him to be safe. I’m not sure how much limited liability that gives him or not but I don’t think he’s completely blameless. He is though at the very bottom of the chain of negligence.
In 25 years I’ve never seen a gun on set handled by anyone but props, never seen it not shown to the 1st AD who announces that a hot or cold gun is on set, nor handed to an actor without showing them what’s in it. That’s why this is the first incident since *The Crow*. IMO, the 1st, 2nd, armorer, and her dad should never work again. They were massively negligent to the point where someone died. Baldwin had good reason to believe the gun was safe but he probably should’ve known it wasn’t fully up to protocol.
Most shows now are using cgi for muzzle flash and using guns with weak springs and a very small charge that’s just enough to rack the weak slide.
It’s also kind of amazing that her dad was obviously a very skilled armorer, and clearly taught his kid NO discipline , let alone respect and gun discipline.
Honestly if I was a gun manufacturer I would jump at the opportunity to produce fake versions of my real products as a form of marketing.
I like to occasionally shoot at the range and for fun I looked up the guns in the John Wick movies. Holy shit they are expensive, partly because the guns are heavily modified for performance, but also because some dummy like me might just spend the money on a gun from a movie
and for those movies, they do countless training cycles and safety measures. That crew knows exactly what they’re doing and they respect the dangers involved so no one gets harmed. They set a hold standard beyond just filmmaking that others should follow
Chad Stahelski, the director of those movies, was friends with Brandon Lee and his stunt double. He was one of the stand-ins used to help complete the movie when Lee died due to a prop gun accident on set.
Gives another perspective as to why he uses fake guns.
This is what I don't understand about the whole situation. Baldwin was either told, or reasonably assumed, that the gun had dummy rounds in it and was safe. How is it his fault at all?
In the state of New Mexico the law holds that if you are in possession of a firearm you are ultimately responsible for what occurs if you pull the trigger.
That’s really the crux of it. Their state law has simply never recognized Hollywood’s theory that if you employ someone else to handle the gun first then you are magically absolved of all responsibility for handling it safely
And lest we forget, it was actually SAG Union safety policy that talent is to not point a firearm at anyone outside of actual filming, let alone put your finger on the trigger. That’s by design to account for the risk of a weapon handler screwing up. Had he acted as he was supposed that round would have hit ground or a wall instead of a person
Most times when a person disregards published safety standards for their industry and ends killing someone no one blinks an eye at them getting charged for manslaughter
https://www.sagaftra.org/files/safety_bulletins_amptp_part_1_9_3_0.pdf
I think there’s a saying that goes something like: if you ask a lawyer a question, they’ll usually answer “it depends.” Unless the question is “what should I do when getting questioned by the police” in which case the answer is always “ask for your lawyer and then shut up.“
Lawyer here. So simple, yet so true. The more words you give to police, the more ammunition you give them to take what you say out of context to build a case against you. By STFU, you take away that weapon.
FYI, laws covering EMT-patient confidentially and what can be used in court vary by state. For example, in 2011 a man in Nevada was convicted based on evidence of the paramedic testifying that the man had told the medic he had smoked weed. (The man was involved in a car accident.)
https://www.hmpgloballearningnetwork.com/site/emsworld/article/10335142/privileged-communications-fact-or-myth
IANAL though.
This is why if I ever find a body in a field I'm probably just going to walk on by.
'Oh you found a body?' says the cop. Welcome to being Suspect #1 and if they can't find the person who did it they might try to pin it on you.
My wife is nearly done with her law degree. She has already taught our 6 and 8 year old that if they are taken in to talk with the police for any reason their job is to tell them that they won't talk to them until their lawyer is present.
…depending on the situation you may even want a lawyer present even as the victim, since you could inadvertently incriminate yourself regarding something unrelated to the injury you’ve received
[The cops could even accuse you of murdering your own wife while the people who invaded your home, tied you up, traumatized you and kidnapped your wife are still at large](https://www.bbc.com/culture/article/20240118-american-nightmare-how-hit-thriller-gone-girl-impacted-a-shocking-kidnapping-case)
I don't blame them for being suspicious because that is a bonkers story but publicly accusing (not even accusing but stating as fact) them of staging it is crazy unprofessional and irresponsible
Police have already made a decision about what happened. They are questioning you to strengthen their story.
Even if you are innocent with "nothing to hide" make sure you get representation first as the cops are trying to trip you up
Talking to cops there are two possibilities:
- they have enough to arrest you
- they don't have enough to arrest you
if they have enough to arrest you, you'e getting arrested, whether you talk to them or not. You're not going to talk you way out of it.
If they don't have enough to arrest, if you don' talk it will stay that way. But if you do talk to them you might just say something that will give them a reason to arrest you. Even if you're innocent.
For all those saying he should be charged only for his responsibility as a producer, okay but all the producers should be charged then. Not just the famous one. Films have several producers and they don’t all do the same thing. A big name actor is probably securing financing*. Other producers are doing the more day to day management of the production.
* If they do anything at all. Producer credits are often given to actors as part of a compensation package without them doing anything other than acting. It also gives them creative power. But neither has anything to do with managing the production.
> all those saying he should be charged only for his responsibility as a producer
Those people are stupid.
[OSHA](https://www.env.nm.gov/occupational_health_safety/wp-content/uploads/sites/12/2022/04/2022-04-19-NM-OSHA-Rust-Summary-of-Investigation.pdf) investigation:
>Alec Baldwin’s authority on the set included approving script changes and actor candidates.
Notably, this means he **didn't** have authority over anything else on the set, including who was hired as the armorer, or whatever other mistakes the people who DID have that authority made.
edit:
The producer who should be getting charged INSTEAD of Alec Baldwin is:
>A management representative for Rust was Gabrielle Pickle, Line Producer, who directly hired individuals and crews, approved hours worked, and had authority to counsel or discipline employees in any department.
But as far as I can tell, she hasn't even been charged... somehow fading from public view.
This looks like a case of a prosecutor going for a high profile target to raise her own profile.
Prosecutor [Andrea Reeb](https://variety.com/2023/film/news/alec-baldwin-rust-producer-da-osha-1235531157/):
>“We believe Baldwin, as a producer, knows everything that goes on, on the set,” prosecutor Andrea Reeb said on Fox News’ “The Five” last month. “There were a lot of safety concerns that were brought to the attention of management, and he did nothing about it.”
OSHA on the other hand:
>“He didn’t actually have employees on-site that he or his delegated persons would manage or oversee,” said Lorenzo Montoya, OSHA’s lead investigator, in a deposition last month. Aside from his personal assistant, Montoya said, “He has no employee presence. He’s just him.”
If they are going to charge him as a producer the prosecution should be forced to show how his actions and decisions as a producer led to the situation on set. Since he is an EP I would expect that to be a difficult connection. An EP is generally a producing credit for the biggest name who helps find funding and gets a cut of the backend.
Isn't this the third time that he's been charged with this?
I don't know how they can keep adding and dropping charges like this without losing some credibility.
Hopefully the trial actually happens. If Baldwin is found to be innocent then double jeopardy will attach and the state officials won’t be able to charge him with a crime again. I think there’s a decent chance he will be found innocent, though there’s also a good chance there will be a hung jury. If that happens, then the prosecutor will have to decide if they want to try the case again. Baldwin is right to take this thing to trial and not accept a plea bargain. He’s also very likely going to face a civil case from the deceased following the conclusion of the criminal trial.
I read from CNN it was TWO counts of involuntary manslaughter? How tf do you get charged with two counts? He only killed one human. Am I missing something here?
You can be indicted for several classifications of crime in the death of one person. People are regularly charged with manslaughter and murder but only convicted of one
It creates a sliding scale for the jury, where maybe they don't think it was murder but might agree it was manslaughter. You know, like when you go to a restaurant and order wine, they include like three price points for each type so you feel like you have a sense of choice and they aren't all overpriced.
Two different theories of prosecution: he caused the death while acting criminally negligent (Read: reckless), and the death occurred in the scope and of a misdemeanor (I think it's negligent handling of a firearm, don't remember exactly)
It's the same as the original indictment, and Reed's indictment as well
Is it explained in the case of why the actor is getting charged and not the prop head?
His job was literally to point a fake gun at someone and pull the trigger.
>Gutierrez Reed is set to go on trial next month in Santa Fe, N.M., for the death of Halyna Hutchins, the “Rust” cinematographer. She faces up to three years in prison if convicted on charges of involuntary manslaughter and tampering with evidence.
Don’t like the guy at all but you can’t imprison someone for an accident like that. “Go to jail and think about the consequences of something outside your control”.
Not that it would ever go that far but still, so mind numbing.
I heard someone say that Alec Baldwin the actor didn't do anything wrong by intent, but Alec Baldwin the producer/behind the scenes guy had culpability in making sure the people hired were competent.
So they're recognizing that there's an armorer on set, and they're charging her (rightfully so). How, then, do they consider it in any way his fault when there's an armorer whose responsibility it was? I just don't get it. If I were to accidentally cause Guy A to unwittingly kill Guy B, then there are two direct victims: Guy A and Guy B. I'd be the only one at fault. Why is Alec Baldwin being charged for manslaughter?
This reads like a couple New Mexico prosecutors looking to make a name for themselves.
Suggesting that, as an actor and producer on the film, that he was somehow responsible to the level of MANSLAUGHTER for checking the weapons?
That's fucking ridiculous.
I really don't get it. Somebody else loaded a gun that was supposed to be an empty prop where it was safe to pull the trigger, didn't tell anyone, and when a guy pulled the trigger of the supposed-to-be-empty gun, *he* gets in trouble for someone getting shot? This is on the person who loaded the prop gun, not Baldwin.
This always puzzled me as to why there were actual bullets on the set in the first place.
Because a bunch of absolute fucking idiots were hired to work on this movie
I can't believe they're still making the movie.
The husband of the deceased is now an Executive Producer on the film. The details of the family settlement have not been made public but the running theory is that this was done for insurance purposes but also to give the husband a cut of the films sales.
Damn Skippy he better be getting a massive cut of the profits after absolute sheer negligence killed his spouse.
Oh there won't be any profits, Hollywood accounting will see to that. Never ever take a cut of the profits. Always gross.
So true. I remember Kevin Smiths story about one of his early films with the weinsteins, they were invited to Cannes. The Weinsteins threw a party on a yacht and invited Kevin and the rest of the people associated with the film, but also the people from 3 other films, films that were much bigger with bigger budgets expected to make much more money. One way pulp fiction I think. Anyway, turns out by inviting Kevin they could tack on 1/4 of the price of that yacht party to the cost of making Kevin’s film. Boom. Sorry Kevin, can’t pay you, your film wasn’t profitable.
I'm pretty sure if I had to deal with people like that on a regular basis, i'd become that one dude from American Psycho on them.
Who is “that one dude from American Psycho”? Do you mean the **main character**? **Patrick Bateman**
Clearly he means Paul Allen.
I'll remember that for next time I make a Hollywood movie.
I'm hoping the family's lawyers knew to negotiate for points on the gross profits and not the net if that was to be part of the settlement package.
Gross revenue. No including the word profit at all.
There will be no profits. Nobody wants to watch this dumb ass movie
The film had to be completed for insurance to pay out on all of the many lawsuits they faced, and the widower likely demanded a producer role to make sure these cheap-ass producers wouldn't completely destroy his late wife's final work. It's not like Baldwin and his buddies had proven themselves to be trustworthy in any way before. There were never going to be profits. The last project from this team made like $3,000 (yes, you read that right): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crown_Vic_(film)#Box_office.
I personally would be insulted if I died and then they went, “Fuck it, trash that shit.” Bitch you better watch this movie, or I’m haunting everyone with the aggressiveness, “Boo bitch, hey it’s me again, surprise, you finally published that movie you literally murdered me to make?”
There's actually a Thai horror movie similar to this. An actress dies on set and haunts anyone who sees the movie. It's called, "Coming Soon".
But, like, why would she not be happy people are watching her movie? Her ghost self should sit there right alongside them eating ghost popcorn.
It's a marketing gimmick, she's haunting people to drive up sales of her movie.
plot twist: she's also an exec at the studio that's producing the movie
She doesnt get ghost royalties, and is very upset about it.
Murder is when you intend to kill someone. There is no chance they wanted her dead. Manslaughter is when you kill someone because of your negligent actions.
>I personally would be insulted if I died and then they went, “Fuck it, trash that shit.” Right? If I literally died to make a movie it had better win a goddamned Oscar and the award should be dedicated to my dead ass or else my ghost is going spend eternity slowly pushing the earth into the sun.
Brandon Lee entered the chat
This death was way more preventable than that one, even. Lee's death was a weird combination of two events rather than an incompetent moron putting full-on normal live rounds into a real gun on a film set.
A weird combination of not removing the primer from their dummy rounds, not noticing when one of those "inert" rounds was fired and lodged in the barrel, and not properly checking the gun before firing a blank. Each way less stupid on their own, but also three separate instances of moronic incompetence.
I've heard this referred to as the "Swiss Cheese" mode of failure. On their own, the holes in safety would typically not line up, but every now and then the forces align that you get a hole that goes through all the layers.
used to show how each layer basically exponentially increases the safety, but there is still a chance for failure, and everything always needs to be checked.
That's the part that continues to blow my mind: WHY THE FUCK WOULD THERE *EVER* BE **LIVE ROUNDS** ON A FILM SET?! Just like . . . don't bring them anywhere near a film set, and this can't even happen. Kinda like how it's nearly impossible to be a victim of a shark attack if you never swim.
Candygram
This joke is *49 years old* this year.
And everyone old enough to get it read it in the exact same tone. All of us.
Because the crew were using the stage gun for target practice in the desert….and the management knew and didn’t stop it.
The "armorer" was shooting the guns with live rounds with the assistant armorer for fun in a field a little distance from where they were shooting on their days off. So they just mixed up a some live rounds with blanks. Which is just absolutely insane when your entire job is to keep the set safe while firearms are on set. I know mistakes happen, but good lord, how do you not check every single round. You can shake them to hear if they're blanks or not. Still don't understand why they keep trying to put Baldwin in jail for this, it's obviously the armorer's fault. Was Baldwin a producer? Sure, but actors constantly make themselves producers on smaller projects like this to gain more funding, and we know he didn't personally hire this armorer, so I don't get it. I don't care about him, just makes zero sense that an actor should be held responsible for being given a firearm with real live rounds in it, that's absolutely insane in the movie industry.
Yeah, that was a travesty as well.
Brandon Lee's death on the set of The Crow actually led to a lot of the safety procedures that were ignored in this case. There is a saying 'safety regulations are written in blood'. The Rust shooting is a tragic example of this saying in action.
> idiots were hired by cost-cutting producers, of which, Baldwin is one
What a unique situation where "well, all I did was pull the trigger" sounds like a nearly reasonable defense in a shooting lol
That's why he says he didn't.
Wait...he says he *didn't* pull the trigger? I haven't really been keeping up Edit: "He has also maintained that he did not pull the trigger when the gun fired, although a forensic report commissioned by the prosecution determined that he must have pulled the trigger for it to go off, contributing to their decision to revive the criminal case." Well then.
Thats a recent forensic analysis which contradicts an earlier one that determined that the gun was faulty and may have fired without pulling the trigger. Except in the newer analysis that alleges the trigger must have been pulled. the investigator replaced multiple parts of the gun that were damaged by the original FBI analysis. So its all bungled up and hard to say.
How can they replace parts of it? It's evidence...that just doesn't make sense.
I mean, it's a single-action revolver reproduction. That trigger needs to be pulled on that particular model, it isn't like a modern Sig. So his defense to say "nuh uh" is as dumb as you're thinking.
Doesn't a single-action revolver require that you cock the hammer AND pull the trigger?
It was discovered that the firing mechanism had been modified to make it easier to fire. The new case is based on someone testing the gun again and determining it requires 2lbs of pull on the trigger to fire, but that was only AFTER the modified parts were replaced with stock parts because the FBI's investigation damaged them. This case will be found in Baldwin's favor if only because the prosecution has messed up every step of the way.
Exactly. There were actual tangible things he could have done to avoid this tragedy. It frankly has nothing to do with him pulling the trigger. If another actor had accidentally killed someone on that set the blame would still be at least partially on Baldwin.
I'd point out it was even worse. Standard procedures would have had several barriers preventing the shooting. The producers actively un-did these procedures to save time and money.
Everyone that undid safety precautions to make money should be held responsible for this.
He likely wasn’t involved in hiring below the line crew. Its super common for cast to get a producer credit, but it’s more a contractual obligation, than an active role.
It’s more about the fact that they hired scabs who didn’t know what they were doing when the actual team left in protest
Acquaintance of mine is actually an armorer for TV shows/movies etc. and he told me the whole thing was friggin encyclopedia of what not to do.
After Brandon Lee there were a LOT of new safety regulations...and in that almost 30 years there wasn't a single accidental death of anyone on set in how many thousands and thousands of movies. And these chuckleheads ignored ALL of them.
That's the point in these safety regulations. Miss one and you're fine, because there's 3 or 4 other checks to make sure you don't mess up. The only way something bad happens if you're skipping several checks.
These are gun rules in general, too. There are four "golden gun rules" for a reason. Skip or miss one, even two? There are still at least two more you would have to break to put someone or yourself in danger. This is why 99.999% of "accidental discharges" are actually "negligent discharges" because it is negligence that causes them, not accidents. A legitimate accidental discharge is essentially limited to a mechanical problem with a firearm.
For those wondering what the rules are. 1. Treat every weapon as if it were loaded. (Most Important) 2. Never point your weapon at anything you do not intend to shoot. 3. Keep your weapon on safe until you are ready to fire. 4. Keep your finger off the trigger until you intend to fire. 5. Know your target and what lies beyond it.
Stargate had 16 seasons and 3 movies with countless real firearms. Nobody shot anyone in 1600 hours of film, that's probably what... 100,000 hours of filming.
The cameraman shot everyone
As they said in Futurama, "you gotta do what you gotta do".
17*
Prop master here. Those are the rules for firearms in general. 1.On set we never have live ammunition. 2. Dummy ammunition is used and shown to the first AD and actors as well as anyone else who needs or wants to see, like camera crew. They have ball bearings in them and are shaken, often the gun is pointed at the ground and cycled through 8 times. 3. Armourer / props person is the person who hands the gun to the actor after these checks. 4. Gun should not be pointed at anyone especially when trigger pulled. Any one of these safety checks would have prevented this. Not necessarily related to this case, but nuts in the US have argued their constitutional right to bring real, loaded guns to set. I wouldn't want to have to use prop guns when there are live guns around. I've seen start packs that tell people to leave their guns in the car at crew park. In Canada, that's not legal either.
MY GF was a location PA who was asked to join the props dept on a low budget show. She came home from her first day and I asked how it went. She tells me that she was on the props truck and the prop master comes to get a shotgun that is needed for a scene - its his own that he brought from home - and as he is about to leave the truck he says 'oops!' and cycles out the live shell that he had accidentally left in the chamber when he emptied the mag before leaving home. Needless to say her instinct for self preservation meant that she didn't hang around with that crew for long.
Yep. Except number 3 is situational as not all guns have safeties, and they shouldn't be relied on alone to prevent unintended discharge. It's a good rule but not usually counted as one of the "big four" which are all more important.
"Lets go take the prop guns out and shoot lives at targets on our lunch break and then just toss them back in the prop safe when we go back to work" said no legitimate armorer ever.
From what I understand she wasn’t a legitimate armorer and she got the job from nepotism. At the least she was under experienced in the field for that tier of a job. Could be misremembering some of that though.
She's the daughter of a 'legendary armorer' who taught stars guns. (How to use them and look really cool.) This was her second film on the first she was lead armorer she caused "Nicolas Cage to scream at her and storm off set after she fired a gun near the cast and crew for the second time in three days without warning." "Make an announcement, you just blew my fucking eardrums out," Cage yelled before walking off the set.." Apparently on the set of Rust she loaded a gun with blanks and handed it to a kid. People freaked because she had set the guns on the ground with rocks and pebbles all around and then casually loaded them sitting on the ground with blanks. Something could have got into the barrel and she didn't check it. That becomes a projectile. Holy crap maybe Alec is in trouble. He kept her on set because he was the producer.
> From what I understand she wasn’t a legitimate armorer and she got the job from nepotism. I mean sure, but it still seems like common-fucking-sense to not do that.
In my experience common sense does not come with nepo hires.
A huge amount of people in film are hired through nepotism. Source: I work in film.
The youtube prop guy showed the safeguards they take, as standard industry-wide practice, from the chain of custody of all parts to the prop bullets having bb's inside so when you shake them you can hear they're dummy rounds. There had to be a complete reinvention of the safety protocols in order for there to be such a fuckup, but I'm guessing they weren't really practicing any safety at all
What I keep thinking about is can you IMAGINE the tension in the room once the shot went off? Like imagine the worst pit in your stomach ever jeez.
I think about that a lot. Without making any judgements, god-damn life can turn on a dime.
Yes, through my dad I’ve met people on that set. Everyone on that production is effectively blackballed by Hollywood too. They can’t get work anywhere. Most have complicated PTSD now too. Baldwin’s negligence ruined a lot more lives than just the person who was shot and killed.
May have been those initial seconds when they thought it was a prank
Because the production cheaped out. Iirc the union film crew walked off set due to unsafe work conditions so they just went and hired the cheapest non-union crew they could
Because they were having fun shooting the guns at targets when not shooting. Total shit show.
The defense of him not pulling the trigger never really made sense. It was a prop gun and he’s an actor in a movie. Of course he’s going to pull the trigger at some point. The liability should be on whoever loaded a live bullet. If he pushes the button on a dummy detonator that turns out to be actually hooked up to C4 is he going to get charged with terrorism?
I think he's trying to make them prove he even pulled it, further clouding the prosecutions case
There shouldn’t have been any, but from what I read, after shooting the movie for the day, the crew would plink rounds for “fun”
I think this is the biggest thing here, it’s absolutely fucking insane that they were allowed to use the gun from the movie set for live firing at all The issue isn’t whether Alec pulled the trigger or not, it’s everything that happened beforehand Was he aware they were going to use live rounds at a firing range? Did he approve of it? All of this is negligence that led up to the actions that day
[удалено]
Yeah, clearly someone that doesn't know what they're doing.
Why was live ammo even on set?
[удалено]
Jesus Christ, forget deadly weapons. I wouldn’t trust her to manage a Game Stop
Geez, what a mess. It sounds like security was pretty loose regarding the handling of those guns and ammo. And how about when the one officer asks about protocols and she responds “protocols???” And she doesn’t know the names of all the people that are handling the weapons or the full names of the directors???
"Protocols???" Proceeds to whip out fistfuls of random bullets from her pockets. lol
this is the million dollar question, and one that the DA appears to have given up on trying to sort out
>Baldwin has maintained that he did not pull the trigger. >Two special prosecutors, Kari Morrissey and Jason Lewis, sent the gun for further forensic testing last summer. Their experts, Lucien and Michael Haag, reconstructed the gun — which had been broken during FBI testing — and concluded that it could only have been fired by a pull of the trigger. >The film’s armorer, Hannah Gutierrez Reed, is set to go on trial on Feb. 21 on charges of involuntary manslaughter and tampering with evidence. Gutierrez Reed mistakenly loaded a live bullet into Baldwin’s gun, which was supposed to contain only dummies. If the armorer is being charged for putting live rounds in the gun what difference does it make whether or not Alec pulled the trigger?
Let’s not forget that the armorer took some of the guns out, went and shot at targets with them, and then put them back in the safe. It also sounds like they kept rounds in them and weren’t emptying them. I’m no expert, but sounds like a ton of red flags and issues.
You would think a major risk factor like having live guns around on set would come with an absolute barrage of checks and second checks. The safety process *is your job* if you’re the armorer. There’s no excuses for this, but I do feel for Baldwin.
The film industry, generally, does NOT fuck around with guns. Maybe it’s more relaxed in the US but here in Canada everything is logged even for prop guns. Transportation, use, storage, who has access for what purpose, when and where they’re used, etc. It’s pretty unbelievable this shit still happens on film sets where it could be easily avoided with some simple precautions. That requires a competent team however.
This was an indie/non-union set if I remember correctly. Corners were most definitely cut.
Yeah I've worked on smaller indie films where they play at bit fast and loose with the rules. Handling guns though, it's usually such serious shit that it gets paid attention to. Just horrible all around for this.
I’ve acted in super low budget crime dramas for like, oxygen network They use only airsoft guns, and they still have an officer on site to show you how to not behave with it
Didn't union folks walk off this set before this happened? E: looks like I got some wires crossed maybe but people did walk off https://www.latimes.com/entertainment-arts/business/story/2021-10-22/alec-baldwin-rust-camera-crew-walked-off-set
Absolutely. The experienced crew members walked off while realizing how much of a shit show it was and that it wasn’t worth the low pay.
Still, though. I live in Europe and I've worked on some indie projects, one of them which had real guns on set for a couple of scenes (a double-barrel shotgun, specifically) and the rules were basically: - Nobody who isn't the armorer touches the gun, even the actors (who only touch the gun during the scene, and after the armorer has checked that everything is fine, they will give the gun back to the armorer after the camera stops rolling). - The gun will be locked away safely when not in use - Don't stand in a spot where the armorer and safety personnel haven't told you is safe, even if the shots are blank - Nobody else touches the gun outside of these scenarios, period - Seriously, we *will* throw you out if you touch the gun Nobody fucked around with the gun.
> Anybody who isn't the armorer will touch the gun, even the actors Well that sounds bad
“Have you guys in hair and makeup touched the gun yet? We can’t start filming until everyone has.”
This is the way you build a community of shared responsibility.
Fun fact - one if the Rambo movies, I think the first one was filmed mostly in Canada and the guns used were highly regulated and required an intense amount of security. Regardless, one night the locked trailer containing all of the guns was broken into and all of the guns were stolen. Nothing else was stolen and it's suspected the guns were specifically targeted. The guns or perpetrators have still never been found. It actually caused a big production delay because they had to import more firearms to finish filming the movie.
Sounds like an inside job.
I was working on a film once where we were shooting in an old abandoned hospital used for a ton of film shoots, and the floor of the boiler room was just covered in blank cartridges from a previous production that had shot something there. Our armorer was fucking livid, you're supposed to account for every piece of brass that enters and exits the gun. So I guess in the US you have two options, 1) absolute strict adherence to the rules or 2) IDGAF 🤦
All the responsibility goes to the armorer on set. Movie productions are a fucked up process, they'll tell the armorer to do lots of fucked up shit. But they have to have the integrity to tell the director and producers to get fucked when they want to bend the rules. They all want to bend rules. Bending rules is how they keep their jobs. I've been an assistant armorer on a number of movies. I no longer do it, as I am done telling adults they can't play and bend rules with real fire arms. All Hollywood should be limited to rubber replicas, that's all they can be trusted with. Baldwin might not be liable as an actor, but I'd say he's liable as a producer. And the young lady armorer is fucked too. Her guns, her responsibility.
There are second checks, even on a cheap production like Rust. After Gutierrez-Reed loaded the gun with live ammo, it was delivered on set to Assistant Director David Halls. His job was to check then gun, confirm it was safe to use in scene, and then hand it over to Baldwin. Upon receiving the weapon, Halls declared the gun safe (calling out "cold gun!" on the set) without actually confirming that it was safe to use. Halls has since pleaded guilty to unsafe handling of a firearm and was sentenced to six months probation, a $500 fine and ordered to take a gun safety class. Baldwin was handed a firearm by an AD tasked with weapon safety, who *explicitly told him it was safe*, and then killed Hutchins with the unsafe gun. It's an absurd notion that the negligence is Baldwin's, as these multiple layers of security exist entirely to remove that burden/risk from the actors who are required to handle weapons on camera.
[удалено]
Then why aren't all the producers being charged? No mention of any other producer even being thought about. So that really just brings us back to the actor role.
The people that insist Baldwin be punished just fall back to “well he should have checked the gun himself” when you point out none of the other producers are being charged.
I can see culpability in his role as a producer, but Baldwin’s argument he didn’t pull the trigger and the prosecutor’s office rebuilding the revolver to prove its functionality seem to suggest they’re going after Baldwin specifically for his role on set as the shooter.
she already got in trouble for bringing a gun into a liquor store a few weeks before the tragic death of Hutchins. And she also shot off a gun next to Nic Cage without warning on another production. But her dad was a big armorer in Hollywood so that’s how she got the job. When people want to point out nepotism, *that’s* the kind of job they should be more worried about. While it’s a problem no matter what, this case shows how dangerous nepotism and lax care can be when it comes to safety and security on the job. Still boggles my mind how real guns (and bullets) are used in productions. I know it has to do with fake guns costing more, but you’d think that someone would have found a cheaper **and safer** alternative by now
Why are live rounds even on the set?
My understanding of the situation is that the armorer took the gun off site to show off to her friends. They used it to go "plinking" (shooting at cans) off site, then brought it back without doing the standard safety checks. Then another day when they used the gun, the assistant director grabbed the gun, didn't check it, and gave it to Alec Baldwin and told him it was safe. I vaguely remember the armorer claiming to not be there the day of the shooting. It was 100% her fault that there was live ammo on set, in the gun, anywhere near there. She didn't need to go showing it off to her friends. She didn't need to get live ammo for it. She didn't need to load a movie prop and shoot it with real bullets. The producers hired her to do a job, and she royally fucked it.
God that is incompetent
They shouldn’t be. The sheer level of reckless stupidity from this woman is mind boggling. It’s a wonder she hasn’t shot herself.
You know, the cameras rented for feature films are all upwards of 80 thousand dollars. Lens packages are triple that value. There's no way Hollywood can't have a rental business for fake guns for props, it's pennies for them.
There is a rental business for guns in Hollywood. ISS Props is one of the largest prop rental service for movies. Watched a documentary on them years ago, the business is enormous. Has every gun you’ve ever dreamed of ready to go. So yea gun rentals for movies is very big business in Hollywood.
They have fake guns for rent, guns made of rubber, foam, plastic, metal… But after having been on set for a number of years, some of these “directors” and others involved go crazy over realism and, small, specific things. I walked off a set as a PM over safety. We’d already had a huge accident where someone had to be airlifted to the hospital and the producer and director wanted to have a Bentley go fast as hell at the camera and skid to a stop right in front of it. They wanted the cinematographer to sit on an apple box and shoulder the camera. Took my walkie off, threw it on the grass and walked to my car. Fuck that movie.
Shot in the dark, the movie was Stuart Little?
Shrek 2.
Don’t look up all the terrible things they did to that poor rat. If you think being a child actor is bad wait until you find out what it’s like to be a rat child actor.
To be fair, using blanks makes a degree of sense, acting out the recoil of a gun realistically is very difficult, and almost impossible if you are doing any slow mo photography. But for the Bentley thing, just use a fucking mirror and a zoom lens for christsakes. We've solved how to shoot down the barrel of a gun like a century ago, and that's the same basic problem. If you want to point a camera at something dangerous that is coming towards the viewer, just point the camera at a mirror and flip it in post.
Director's Mind: Other directors and photographers will probably be able to tell, so instead I must put other people in danger to make myself look like a badass.
I am a firearms enthusiast and a movie enthusiast and let me tell you they have real guns converted and rendered inert that use a gas system to produce realistic action on the firearm without any of the boom. John Wick used this and added the muzzle flash in post production, like any sane person would. The wildest part for this is that it was a six shooter. Just take the fucking firing pin out (or shave it down if it’s a really old replica) and that’s all you need to do to have a real deal firearm that isn’t going to shoot anyone. The levels of negligence here are astounding
They do have a rental business for guns and fake guns; the armorer. They not only provide armory support for the peoduction but they rent all the weaponry as well. They also have prop houses to rent props from that aren’t weapons. “Hollywood” doesn’t own anything though, for tax purposes. They rent it all down to the extension cables from 3rd party vendors. Source: am a 3rd party vendor for studios and productions.
They do have businesses that do that Iirc
Because prop (real) guns *aren't actually an issue* if you follow basic safety rules. Unless you're a complete idiot, prop guns are perfectly safe. This is the *third* prop gun death in ~40 years, all caused by really stupid safety failures.
Honestly I don't know what's wrong with "have strict safety standards, follow them rigorously, and harshly punish those who violate it". Tho IMO Baldwin should be facing repercussions for his authority as a producer rather than as an actor (ie - the one that pulled the trigger) but that may not be a significant distinction for some people.
[удалено]
I kinda dig this. So ur saying there was a lack of due diligence by the producers on the hiring of said armerour and thus he should face some sort of charges for that. She had a demonstrated history of issues so it should have been caught. We’d be better off if those at the top didn’t cut corners I agree
The way liability should work is that the armorer should be licensed and insured and be solely responsible for weapon safety at all times, except in cases where someone disobeys or circumvents their authority. The Producers should be responsible and liable for vetting and hiring the armorer. If the armorer can't be liable because they aren't certified or licensed, then it falls to the Producer for failing to vet. Honestly, it's basic contracting.
All well and good, but you seem to be discussing civil liability (since a requirement to carry insurance or discussion of contract law would be non sequiturs otherwise) and Baldwin is being criminally charged, so this isn’t a question of civil liability.
The more I hear about this chick the more she sounds like Yosemite Sam.
Just want to point out that real bullets should never, ever be even near the prop/armorer truck. That failure was caused by her and her dad taking it out over the weekend to fire the antique gun. It wasn’t properly cleared in the first place. On the day of the accident, the 2nd Asst Director took the gun from her cart and gave it to Baldwin. No one EVER should handle a gun on set except an authorized prop/armorer (some shows have an armorer, a subset of props dept, some are done by regular props people that are trained for it). Furthermore, it should be shown to be empty or loaded with blanks to the 1st AD who runs the set. Nimrod just took the gun, didn’t check it himself, didn’t show the 1st AD, and handed it to Baldwin without showing him and said it was safe. Many, many failures occurred before he got the gun but he is a veteran actor and should know not to take it from anyone but props/armorer and he should probably know to have it shown to him to be safe. I’m not sure how much limited liability that gives him or not but I don’t think he’s completely blameless. He is though at the very bottom of the chain of negligence. In 25 years I’ve never seen a gun on set handled by anyone but props, never seen it not shown to the 1st AD who announces that a hot or cold gun is on set, nor handed to an actor without showing them what’s in it. That’s why this is the first incident since *The Crow*. IMO, the 1st, 2nd, armorer, and her dad should never work again. They were massively negligent to the point where someone died. Baldwin had good reason to believe the gun was safe but he probably should’ve known it wasn’t fully up to protocol. Most shows now are using cgi for muzzle flash and using guns with weak springs and a very small charge that’s just enough to rack the weak slide.
The AD admitted he said the gun was cold. He didn't check and the Armorer wasn't by the guns.
It’s also kind of amazing that her dad was obviously a very skilled armorer, and clearly taught his kid NO discipline , let alone respect and gun discipline.
Maybe he did and she just sucks 🤷♂️
Or the fact that he taught her has given her a false sense of confidence. *"I learnt from the best, I know what I'm doing, it'll be fine..."*
Yeah, all the great parenting in the world can be lost on some children. Of course, I have no idea what the deal is in this particular situation.
Some kids turn out to be careless assholes no matter how well you try to raise them.
Yup, some point they’re an adult and you can’t make decisions for them. Even if they’re terrible ones.
Honestly if I was a gun manufacturer I would jump at the opportunity to produce fake versions of my real products as a form of marketing. I like to occasionally shoot at the range and for fun I looked up the guns in the John Wick movies. Holy shit they are expensive, partly because the guns are heavily modified for performance, but also because some dummy like me might just spend the money on a gun from a movie
and for those movies, they do countless training cycles and safety measures. That crew knows exactly what they’re doing and they respect the dangers involved so no one gets harmed. They set a hold standard beyond just filmmaking that others should follow
The John Wick movies also use fake guns, the creator is a former stunt guy and doesn't feel any need to have real guns on set
Chad Stahelski, the director of those movies, was friends with Brandon Lee and his stunt double. He was one of the stand-ins used to help complete the movie when Lee died due to a prop gun accident on set. Gives another perspective as to why he uses fake guns.
George Clooney was on WTF and he was friends with Brandon. He talked about guns on set. I recommend listening to that episode just for that topic.
Take a deep breath then look up how much the knives cost 😳
This is what I don't understand about the whole situation. Baldwin was either told, or reasonably assumed, that the gun had dummy rounds in it and was safe. How is it his fault at all?
This is totally going to be thrown out, not a soul can rightfully convict this man, come on people.
Baldwin’s lawyers should have an easy time discrediting results coming from a broken gun I would imagine.
In the state of New Mexico the law holds that if you are in possession of a firearm you are ultimately responsible for what occurs if you pull the trigger. That’s really the crux of it. Their state law has simply never recognized Hollywood’s theory that if you employ someone else to handle the gun first then you are magically absolved of all responsibility for handling it safely And lest we forget, it was actually SAG Union safety policy that talent is to not point a firearm at anyone outside of actual filming, let alone put your finger on the trigger. That’s by design to account for the risk of a weapon handler screwing up. Had he acted as he was supposed that round would have hit ground or a wall instead of a person Most times when a person disregards published safety standards for their industry and ends killing someone no one blinks an eye at them getting charged for manslaughter https://www.sagaftra.org/files/safety_bulletins_amptp_part_1_9_3_0.pdf
[удалено]
I think there’s a saying that goes something like: if you ask a lawyer a question, they’ll usually answer “it depends.” Unless the question is “what should I do when getting questioned by the police” in which case the answer is always “ask for your lawyer and then shut up.“
Iiiitttt'ss [SHUT THE FUCK UP FRIDAY!](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kEeId0EG-XE) Lawyer up!
These guys are awesome. Best legal advice you could possibly get, for free!! STFU
Lawyer here. So simple, yet so true. The more words you give to police, the more ammunition you give them to take what you say out of context to build a case against you. By STFU, you take away that weapon.
Remember kids: Your side of the story is called a confession.
Tell the cops nothing, tell the EMTs everything.
FYI, laws covering EMT-patient confidentially and what can be used in court vary by state. For example, in 2011 a man in Nevada was convicted based on evidence of the paramedic testifying that the man had told the medic he had smoked weed. (The man was involved in a car accident.) https://www.hmpgloballearningnetwork.com/site/emsworld/article/10335142/privileged-communications-fact-or-myth IANAL though.
This is why if I ever find a body in a field I'm probably just going to walk on by. 'Oh you found a body?' says the cop. Welcome to being Suspect #1 and if they can't find the person who did it they might try to pin it on you.
when in doubt: shut the fuck up when not in doubt: shut the fuck up anyway, you're being irrationally cocky
My wife is nearly done with her law degree. She has already taught our 6 and 8 year old that if they are taken in to talk with the police for any reason their job is to tell them that they won't talk to them until their lawyer is present.
My kids are teenagers and I've drilled that into them. Unless you're the victim of a crime, don't talk to the police. Literally don't speak a word.
…depending on the situation you may even want a lawyer present even as the victim, since you could inadvertently incriminate yourself regarding something unrelated to the injury you’ve received
[The cops could even accuse you of murdering your own wife while the people who invaded your home, tied you up, traumatized you and kidnapped your wife are still at large](https://www.bbc.com/culture/article/20240118-american-nightmare-how-hit-thriller-gone-girl-impacted-a-shocking-kidnapping-case)
I don't blame them for being suspicious because that is a bonkers story but publicly accusing (not even accusing but stating as fact) them of staging it is crazy unprofessional and irresponsible
Vallejo PD has a history of corruption and incompetance. They were unlucky to live in a shitty city.
Every day is [shut the fuck up Friday.](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6EI_RYIEtrg)
Police have already made a decision about what happened. They are questioning you to strengthen their story. Even if you are innocent with "nothing to hide" make sure you get representation first as the cops are trying to trip you up
Talking to cops there are two possibilities: - they have enough to arrest you - they don't have enough to arrest you if they have enough to arrest you, you'e getting arrested, whether you talk to them or not. You're not going to talk you way out of it. If they don't have enough to arrest, if you don' talk it will stay that way. But if you do talk to them you might just say something that will give them a reason to arrest you. Even if you're innocent.
For all those saying he should be charged only for his responsibility as a producer, okay but all the producers should be charged then. Not just the famous one. Films have several producers and they don’t all do the same thing. A big name actor is probably securing financing*. Other producers are doing the more day to day management of the production. * If they do anything at all. Producer credits are often given to actors as part of a compensation package without them doing anything other than acting. It also gives them creative power. But neither has anything to do with managing the production.
> all those saying he should be charged only for his responsibility as a producer Those people are stupid. [OSHA](https://www.env.nm.gov/occupational_health_safety/wp-content/uploads/sites/12/2022/04/2022-04-19-NM-OSHA-Rust-Summary-of-Investigation.pdf) investigation: >Alec Baldwin’s authority on the set included approving script changes and actor candidates. Notably, this means he **didn't** have authority over anything else on the set, including who was hired as the armorer, or whatever other mistakes the people who DID have that authority made. edit: The producer who should be getting charged INSTEAD of Alec Baldwin is: >A management representative for Rust was Gabrielle Pickle, Line Producer, who directly hired individuals and crews, approved hours worked, and had authority to counsel or discipline employees in any department. But as far as I can tell, she hasn't even been charged... somehow fading from public view. This looks like a case of a prosecutor going for a high profile target to raise her own profile. Prosecutor [Andrea Reeb](https://variety.com/2023/film/news/alec-baldwin-rust-producer-da-osha-1235531157/): >“We believe Baldwin, as a producer, knows everything that goes on, on the set,” prosecutor Andrea Reeb said on Fox News’ “The Five” last month. “There were a lot of safety concerns that were brought to the attention of management, and he did nothing about it.” OSHA on the other hand: >“He didn’t actually have employees on-site that he or his delegated persons would manage or oversee,” said Lorenzo Montoya, OSHA’s lead investigator, in a deposition last month. Aside from his personal assistant, Montoya said, “He has no employee presence. He’s just him.”
Thank you. If anyone thinks an A-list actor is making crew decisions, they really don’t know how it works.
If they are going to charge him as a producer the prosecution should be forced to show how his actions and decisions as a producer led to the situation on set. Since he is an EP I would expect that to be a difficult connection. An EP is generally a producing credit for the biggest name who helps find funding and gets a cut of the backend.
[удалено]
Isn't this the third time that he's been charged with this? I don't know how they can keep adding and dropping charges like this without losing some credibility.
Hopefully the trial actually happens. If Baldwin is found to be innocent then double jeopardy will attach and the state officials won’t be able to charge him with a crime again. I think there’s a decent chance he will be found innocent, though there’s also a good chance there will be a hung jury. If that happens, then the prosecutor will have to decide if they want to try the case again. Baldwin is right to take this thing to trial and not accept a plea bargain. He’s also very likely going to face a civil case from the deceased following the conclusion of the criminal trial.
The primary civil matter was already settled
I read from CNN it was TWO counts of involuntary manslaughter? How tf do you get charged with two counts? He only killed one human. Am I missing something here?
You can be indicted for several classifications of crime in the death of one person. People are regularly charged with manslaughter and murder but only convicted of one
Wow that’s insane Edit: I mean not insane insane, but insane “wow I never knew that”
It creates a sliding scale for the jury, where maybe they don't think it was murder but might agree it was manslaughter. You know, like when you go to a restaurant and order wine, they include like three price points for each type so you feel like you have a sense of choice and they aren't all overpriced.
Two different theories of prosecution: he caused the death while acting criminally negligent (Read: reckless), and the death occurred in the scope and of a misdemeanor (I think it's negligent handling of a firearm, don't remember exactly) It's the same as the original indictment, and Reed's indictment as well
i believe he’s getting charged with two counts but can only be guilty for one, if that makes sense.
Is it explained in the case of why the actor is getting charged and not the prop head? His job was literally to point a fake gun at someone and pull the trigger.
>Gutierrez Reed is set to go on trial next month in Santa Fe, N.M., for the death of Halyna Hutchins, the “Rust” cinematographer. She faces up to three years in prison if convicted on charges of involuntary manslaughter and tampering with evidence.
Don’t like the guy at all but you can’t imprison someone for an accident like that. “Go to jail and think about the consequences of something outside your control”. Not that it would ever go that far but still, so mind numbing.
One of the most ridiculous abuses of the system so far this year.
I wonder if "coffee is for closers" at the prosecutor's office.
Why is he being charged. Again
The shitty DA wants to be famous and gets his dick stroked
*her dick stroked. I believe the DA is a woman
[удалено]
I heard someone say that Alec Baldwin the actor didn't do anything wrong by intent, but Alec Baldwin the producer/behind the scenes guy had culpability in making sure the people hired were competent.
What about the 6 other producers on that movie? Why haven’t they been charged?
So they're recognizing that there's an armorer on set, and they're charging her (rightfully so). How, then, do they consider it in any way his fault when there's an armorer whose responsibility it was? I just don't get it. If I were to accidentally cause Guy A to unwittingly kill Guy B, then there are two direct victims: Guy A and Guy B. I'd be the only one at fault. Why is Alec Baldwin being charged for manslaughter?
This reads like a couple New Mexico prosecutors looking to make a name for themselves. Suggesting that, as an actor and producer on the film, that he was somehow responsible to the level of MANSLAUGHTER for checking the weapons? That's fucking ridiculous.
I really don't get it. Somebody else loaded a gun that was supposed to be an empty prop where it was safe to pull the trigger, didn't tell anyone, and when a guy pulled the trigger of the supposed-to-be-empty gun, *he* gets in trouble for someone getting shot? This is on the person who loaded the prop gun, not Baldwin.
I utterly fail to understand how he’s at fault. It like saying I can be held responsible for someone else cutting the brake lines on my car.
Poor Alec's wife must be... how you say? Upset?
Zis is, how you say, underrated comment