Alec Baldwin trial update

[gtb1943]

Not sure anyone cares anymore but since this was once a fairly hot topic here I thought I would post this

https://variety.com/2024/film/news/...guns-before-rust-shooting-accused-1236041575/

 

[nightrain]

If I was going to create a whack a mole game, Baldwin would be by centerpiece. And the hammer?

 

[CyberB0b]

 

[Quickdraw]

Guilty!

 

[Praxit]

..well, that's a good remark. I agree 100%

 

[triplets_93]

I stand behind Alec Baldwin... Always

 

[Creeper]

I am no fan of Alec Baldwin, not by a longshot. But since this is a legal case I wonder how strong the case against him really is. Was he reckless with a firearm? Sounds like yes. But it is reasonable for him to have expected the gun would be loaded with blanks and not live rounds? What is the behavior on the sets of all other movies where firearms are used? Was it his fault live rounds were even on the set in the first place? And who loaded the live rounds in the replica gun? and why?

As producer I can see where Baldwin has liability for whatever occurs on set. But civil liability is different than criminal liability where the punishment could be jail time and a felony record. No matter who the defendant I want to see fairness, where everyone is treated the same regardless of who they are. This is what is meant by lady justice is blind.

I am not saying Baldwin is not guilty. I am just wondering if there is really criminal negligence in this case. I absolutely see liability for not just his recklessness, but also the things that led to this horrible accident. If he is sued into the poor house I think it would be justified. I need to see more to believe he should go to prison. As the articles states, he was waving the gun around a bit, and he even fired off a blank round after the director yelled cut. But this leads me to believe Baldwin thought the gun was harmless. What reason would he have to think the gun might be loaded with live rounds? Again, recklessness is at least a civil liability issue. I am questioning if it was criminal.

 

[gtb1943]

I am no fan of Alec Baldwin, not by a longshot. But since this is a legal case I wonder how strong the case against him really is. Was he reckless with a firearm? Sounds like yes. But it is reasonable for him to have expected the gun would be loaded with blanks and not live rounds? What is the behavior on the sets of all other movies where firearms are used? Was it his fault live rounds were even on the set in the first place? And who loaded the live rounds in the replica gun? and why?

As producer I can see where Baldwin has liability for whatever occurs on set. But civil liability is different than criminal liability where the punishment could be jail time and a felony record. No matter who the defendant I want to see fairness, where everyone is treated the same regardless of who they are. This is what is meant by lady justice is blind.

I am not saying Baldwin is not guilty. I am just wondering if there is really criminal negligence in this case. I absolutely see liability for not just his recklessness, but also the things that led to this horrible accident. If he is sued into the poor house I think it would be justified. I need to see more to believe he should go to prison. As the articles states, he was waving the gun around a bit, and he even fired off a blank round after the director yelled cut. But this leads me to believe Baldwin thought the gun was harmless. What reason would he have to think the gun might be loaded with live rounds? Again, recklessness is at least a civil liability issue. I am questioning if it was criminal.

over the year many cases have shown that it is up to the person with the gun in his hand to ensure the safety of all around him.
CRIMINAL COURTS HAVE MADE THIS VIRTUALLY ABSOLUTE
just because he is a famous actor is not going to cut him any slack in an honest court
IN the end he was the man with the gun in his hand; and your claims about that not being criminal behavior as regards how he was acting is BS.
It has certainly been declared that time and again by juries.

 

[zrinkill]

Fry him!

 

[Creeper]

over the year many cases have shown that it is up to the person with the gun in his hand to ensure the safety of all around him.
CRIMINAL COURTS HAVE MADE THIS VIRTUALLY ABSOLUTE
just because he is a famous actor is not going to cut him any slack in an honest court
IN the end he was the man with the gun in his hand; and your claims about that not being criminal behavior as regards how he was acting is BS.
It has certainly been declared that time and again by juries.

If the gun was a real gun and the user had a reasonable expectation to assume the gun is loaded with live rounds, of course there would be no question. But in this case, we are talking about gun used on a movie set which is supposed to be loaded with blanks. In fact, the rules state there are not supposed to be live rounds used on movie sets. The question is, did Baldwin have a reasonable expectation that the gun was safe? Was he told the gun was safe?

When movies are made guns with blanks are used for authenticity. But they are absolutely pointed in the direction of other actors to get the right action shots. Heck, I have been to wild West shows where they use blanks to re-enact scenes from the old West where fake gunslingers shoot at each other. I am not excusing Baldwin's reckless behavior. I am asking, maybe even debating, whether it was criminal.

Let's pretend it wasn't Alec Baldwin. What if it was Jason Mamoa, or Harrison Ford, or even some stunt guy.

 

[gtb1943]

If the gun was a real gun and the user had a reasonable expectation to assume the gun is loaded with live rounds, of course there would be no question. But in this case, we are talking about gun used on a movie set which is supposed to be loaded with blanks. In fact, the rules state there are not supposed to be live rounds used on movie sets. The question is, did Baldwin have a reasonable expectation that the gun was safe? Was he told the gun was safe?

When movies are made guns with blanks are used for authenticity. But they are absolutely pointed in the direction of other actors to get the right action shots. Heck, I have been to wild West shows where they use blanks to re-enact scenes from the old West where fake gunslingers shoot at each other. I am not excusing Baldwin's reckless behavior. I am asking, maybe even debating, whether it was criminal.

Let's pretend it wasn't Alec Baldwin. What if it was Jason Mamoa, or Harrison Ford, or even some stunt guy.

dude you really do not know what you are talking about. This is a real live weapon not a stage prop
https://www.koat.com/article/alec-baldwin-charged-rust-shooting-gun-analysis/42578415

and once again you are trying to say actors are special and should not be held to the same standards as other people

 

[CyberB0b]

and once again you are trying to say actors are special and should not be held to the same standards as other people

He's not saying that at all. He's saying part of their job is to pretend that they are in the Wild West and point and shoot blanks at each other. The armorer was already found guilty. She was the expert. Baldwin is just a dolt with a prop.

 

[gtb1943]

He's not saying that at all. He's saying part of their job is to pretend that they are in the Wild West and point and shoot blanks at each other. The armorer was already found guilty. She was the expert. Baldwin is just a dolt with a prop.

his reckless actions before the shot was fire would be called criminal negligence in a fair trial.
And once again the final responsibility for what happens with a gun is in the hands of the person wielding it
Stunned so many seem to think being an actor negates that

 

[Creeper]

dude you really do not know what you are talking about. This is a real live weapon not a stage prop
https://www.koat.com/article/alec-baldwin-charged-rust-shooting-gun-analysis/42578415

and once again you are trying to say actors are special and should not be held to the same standards as other people

You are focusing on the wrong point. Of course the gun is real since it actually did fire a live round. The point is Baldwin's expectation that there was a live round in the chamber. No doubt there is negligence in this case, but is it criminal? Certainly Baldwin did not intend to harm anyone. The question is, did he have a reasonable expectation that the gun was loaded with blanks and would not harm anyone? Did he pull the trigger on purpose or was it an accident?

Brandon Lee was killed when an actor fired a gun at him for a scene in a movie. The gun was loaded with blanks but a dummy bullet from a previous scene was lodged in the barrel of the gun. The explosion from the blank round dislodged the dummy which hit Lee and killed him. The actor in that case was not charged with any crime. No one accused him of not checking the weapon to make sure it was safe. IMO, someone was negligent there too. But there were no charges of criminal negligence.

I could probably argue this case in either direction depending on whether Baldwin pulled the trigger intentionally or if it was a stupid accident. But from a legal standpoint, if there is doubt then verdict is not guilty.

 

[gtb1943]

You are focusing on the wrong point. Of course the gun is real since it actually did fire a live round. The point is Baldwin's expectation that there was a live round in the chamber. No doubt there is negligence in this case, but is it criminal? Certainly Baldwin did not intend to harm anyone. The question is, did he have a reasonable expectation that the gun was loaded with blanks and would not harm anyone? Did he pull the trigger on purpose or was it an accident?

Brandon Lee was killed when an actor fired a gun at him for a scene in a movie. The gun was loaded with blanks but a dummy bullet from a previous scene was lodged in the barrel of the gun. The explosion from the blank round dislodged the dummy which hit Lee and killed him. The actor in that case was not charged with any crime. No one accused him of not checking the weapon to make sure it was safe. IMO, someone was negligent there too. But there were no charges of criminal negligence.

I could probably argue this case in either direction depending on whether Baldwin pulled the trigger intentionally or if it was a stupid accident. But from a legal standpoint, if there is doubt then verdict is not guilty.

So one guy got off when he should have been more careful so that makes it ok.
I am very familiar with that case and the Jon Erik Hexum case as well. BOTH showed criminal negligence by several people but it was all buried because it was Hollywood; though in the later case there was a HUGE out of court settlement.
In both these cases a number of people should have stepped up to stop what was going on. In the Baldwin case, the minute he started to wave a gun around like numerous accounts have described, action should have been taken to close the shoot down and an investigation started.
BUT in the end the person with the gun in his hand is the one ultimately responsible
Show me a law that says an actor is exempt.

 

[CalPolyTechnique]

If the gun was a real gun and the user had a reasonable expectation to assume the gun is loaded with live rounds, of course there would be no question. But in this case, we are talking about gun used on a movie set which is supposed to be loaded with blanks. In fact, the rules state there are not supposed to be live rounds used on movie sets. The question is, did Baldwin have a reasonable expectation that the gun was safe? Was he told the gun was safe?

When movies are made guns with blanks are used for authenticity. But they are absolutely pointed in the direction of other actors to get the right action shots. Heck, I have been to wild West shows where they use blanks to re-enact scenes from the old West where fake gunslingers shoot at each other. I am not excusing Baldwin's reckless behavior. I am asking, maybe even debating, whether it was criminal.

Let's pretend it wasn't Alec Baldwin. What if it was Jason Mamoa, or Harrison Ford, or even some stunt guy.

Not to mention they have a designated armorer on the set that manages all firearms on the set. She was sentenced to 18 months. This isn’t a scenario of a guy waving around a firearm at a barbecue. There’s reasonable presumption that on a movie set the guns do not have live ammunition. Involuntary manslaughter? Sure, but not murder as I’m sure some are praying for.

 

[gtb1943]

I fired my first fire arm at 9 when my father taught me to shoot a 22 rifle. Once I was strong enough to lift it and aim it. I fired my first pistol (22 revovler) at twelve. Been handling weapons for over 50 years.
and the one thing that every single fire arms instructor; military officer and enlisted man, and police officer has stated is THIS
The person who has the weapon in his possession and the finger on the trigger is the one ULTIMATELY responsible for what that weapons dos from that point on
SHOW ME A LAW THAT SAYS ACTORS ARE AN EXCEPTION

 

[Creeper]

I fired my first fire arm at 9 when my father taught me to shoot a 22 rifle. Once I was strong enough to lift it and aim it. I fired my first pistol (22 revovler) at twelve. Been handling weapons for over 50 years.
and the one thing that every single fire arms instructor; military officer and enlisted man, and police officer has stated is THIS
The person who has the weapon in his possession and the finger on the trigger is the one ULTIMATELY responsible for what that weapons dos from that point on
SHOW ME A LAW THAT SAYS ACTORS ARE AN EXCEPTION

It is not about actors, it is about negligence law. If Baldwin was in his back yard waving a loaded gun around and it went off and killed someone there is no question about his negligence and culpability. He could easily be charged with a crime. But we have to consider the exact circumstances of this shooting. He is an actor, he was on a movie set, and he was rehearsing a scene in the movie which involved the firing of the prop gun. What if he ws aiming at a nother actor in the same scene as the script called for? similar to the Brandon Lee incident.

What if it was a civil war re-enactment, and the local butcher was playing the part of a union soldier and someone loaded his gun with gun powder then a real lead shot. The butcher has no idea someone dropped a lead ball down the barrel of his gun and when he fires it he kills someone playing a confederate soldier. Does the butcher commit a crime? Is he even negligent if he relied on an expert to load his rifle instead of himself?

I again will clarify, I allow that Baldwin was negligent or reckless, but does it rise to the level of a criminal offense if he had no idea the gun was loaded with live rounds. This is not a case where people handling the gun would expect it to be loaded with live rounds.

 

[Tabascocat]

Cast and crew were plinking with the gun during their off times, Baldwin included. He, and others, knew there was live rounds out and about. The last person to handle a gun is liable for a safety check. He should get involuntary manslaughter, not a murder charge. The armorer is also at fault for allowing this to happen.

 

[gtb1943]

It is not about actors, it is about negligence law. If Baldwin was in his back yard waving a loaded gun around and it went off and killed someone there is no question about his negligence and culpability. He could easily be charged with a crime. But we have to consider the exact circumstances of this shooting. He is an actor, he was on a movie set, and he was rehearsing a scene in the movie which involved the firing of the prop gun. What if he ws aiming at a nother actor in the same scene as the script called for? similar to the Brandon Lee incident.

What if it was a civil war re-enactment, and the local butcher was playing the part of a union soldier and someone loaded his gun with gun powder then a real lead shot. The butcher has no idea someone dropped a lead ball down the barrel of his gun and when he fires it he kills someone playing a confederate soldier. Does the butcher commit a crime? Is he even negligent if he relied on an expert to load his rifle instead of himself?

I again will clarify, I allow that Baldwin was negligent or reckless, but does it rise to the level of a criminal offense if he had no idea the gun was loaded with live rounds. This is not a case where people handling the gun would expect it to be loaded with live rounds.

no its just a case where SOMEONE DIED due to negligence
If no one does time for that then what is the point?
And once again you are making excuses for people who are negligent. I can see you really no little about how actual thinking intelligent people deal with fire arms
only the stupid and careless