Alec Baldwin

csirl

Well-Known Member
Messages
3,671
Reaction score
3,963
Are the charges against him more to do with him being the producer and so being responsible for safety than him being the person who pulled the trigger?
 

gtb1943

Well-Known Member
Messages
2,608
Reaction score
2,634
Are the charges against him more to do with him being the producer and so being responsible for safety than him being the person who pulled the trigger?
Its kind of vague from what I can see; but it does seem that its about him having the gun in his hand and him pulling the trigger (moron still claims the gun went off all by itself)

Despite what some idiots think that is what matters in the end; who had the gun in his hand when it happened.

Just because he is a Hollywood big shot should not change that FACT.
 

dsturgeon

Well-Known Member
Messages
4,141
Reaction score
3,949
Its kind of vague from what I can see; but it does seem that its about him having the gun in his hand and him pulling the trigger (moron still claims the gun went off all by itself)

Despite what some idiots think that is what matters in the end; who had the gun in his hand when it happened.

Just because he is a Hollywood big shot should not change that FACT.
You didn't answer my question, is he getting a jury trial? You seem to be stressing out about what people who are not going to be involved in the trial think. Once again, I have not followed this, but I believe he is charged with involuntary manslaughter.

Involuntary manslaughter:
the crime of killing another human being unlawfully but unintentionally.

The prosecutor will make the case, the defendants lawyer will make his case, the jury of people like us, will decide within the laws for that charge if he is guilty or not. He will be punished or let off.

You seem to be over emotional about this, eat a snickers
 

nobody

Well-Known Member
Messages
10,362
Reaction score
18,440
I guess he should have checked it but I suspect most of Hollywood has no idea how to do that, which is why they hire people who do.

I honestly don't care either way because he'll never serve time. You seem to be a little too worked up over it.
There's basic gun safety. Don't point a gun at someone unless you intend to shoot them. She wasn't an actor or in the scene. He had zero reason to point the gun at her. Reportedly they had and exchange and he pointed it at her and pulled the trigger, obviously not intending to kill her but the anger was there. He had no business pointing it at anyone, even during a scene. Actors have died from even blanks.

So 1) He should have checked the firearm. They are all supposed to take gun safety courses to work with them. That's a typical requirement for insurance companies to insure them. 2) He reportedly pointed a gun at someone not as part of a scene but after he became angry with her. At the very best, that's criminal negligence. At worst manslaughter unless they have evidence he knew it was loaded with real rounds and intended to kill her and then plead accident.

If he didn't get charged with something, that's a miscarriage of justice. Someone died due to his actions. Even if the gun was loaded, had he not pointed and fired she would have lived.
 

gtb1943

Well-Known Member
Messages
2,608
Reaction score
2,634
You didn't answer my question, is he getting a jury trial? You seem to be stressing out about what people who are not going to be involved in the trial think. Once again, I have not followed this, but I believe he is charged with involuntary manslaughter.

Involuntary manslaughter:
the crime of killing another human being unlawfully but unintentionally.

The prosecutor will make the case, the defendants lawyer will make his case, the jury of people like us, will decide within the laws for that charge if he is guilty or not. He will be punished or let off.

You seem to be over emotional about this, eat a snickers
You seem to want to play kumb by ya all the time
Have to laugh at your faux concern
Bottom line is that you are terrified of judging anyone anytime
So go were out your time out card

As regards what will happen of course he will get a jury trial

Just how ignorant are you?
 

dsturgeon

Well-Known Member
Messages
4,141
Reaction score
3,949
You seem to want to play kumb by ya all the time
Have to laugh at your faux concern
Bottom line is that you are terrified of judging anyone anytime
So go were out your time out card

As regards what will happen of course he will get a jury trial

Just how ignorant are you?
I am not like you. I would not rule by emotions. When someone else's life is left up to me, in this case sentencing, I would have to be 100 % confident with the verdict in either direction within the law or statutes I am bound by.

As to "kum by yah", outside of the law of the courtroom, if it were in my hands, I would make very different judgements, but I would also have to be 100 % certain.
 
Last edited:

gtb1943

Well-Known Member
Messages
2,608
Reaction score
2,634
I am not like you. I would not rule by emotions. When someone else's life is left up to me, in this case sentencing, I would have to be 100 % confident with the verdict in either direction within the law or statutes I am bound by.

As to "kum by yah", outside of the law of the courtroom, if it were in my hands, I would make very different judgements, but I would also have to be 100 % certain.
Yeah sure you claim a lot but show little

Your desperate need not to judge you defend by claiming its all about emotion

OR is it you believe in special treatment for the elite? Frankly that sounds a lot more like what you are really all about.
 

gtb1943

Well-Known Member
Messages
2,608
Reaction score
2,634
There's basic gun safety. Don't point a gun at someone unless you intend to shoot them. She wasn't an actor or in the scene. He had zero reason to point the gun at her. Reportedly they had and exchange and he pointed it at her and pulled the trigger, obviously not intending to kill her but the anger was there. He had no business pointing it at anyone, even during a scene. Actors have died from even blanks.

So 1) He should have checked the firearm. They are all supposed to take gun safety courses to work with them. That's a typical requirement for insurance companies to insure them. 2) He reportedly pointed a gun at someone not as part of a scene but after he became angry with her. At the very best, that's criminal negligence. At worst manslaughter unless they have evidence he knew it was loaded with real rounds and intended to kill her and then plead accident.

If he didn't get charged with something, that's a miscarriage of justice. Someone died due to his actions. Even if the gun was loaded, had he not pointed and fired she would have lived.
the cult of celebrity in this culture is disgusting

Its just like it was centuries ago when the nobility always got special treatment and never paid for their crimes


you can see several in this threat who believe that
 

Risen Star

Likes Collector
Messages
86,090
Reaction score
201,634
CowboysZone ULTIMATE Fan
I dunno about this one. He was the mastermind of the whole operation, I guess, so he's responsible for all that happens on-set. Still there's a person who's entire job is to make sure this doesn't happen.

With today's CGI, I don't know why a gun would ever need to be actually fired. I guess they're going for realism, but who knows.
That's what happened to Brandon Lee. They wanted to use live rounds to make it look real.
 

nobody

Well-Known Member
Messages
10,362
Reaction score
18,440
the cult of celebrity in this culture is disgusting

Its just like it was centuries ago when the nobility always got special treatment and never paid for their crimes


you can see several in this threat who believe that
Sadly, it is true, but everyone should be held to the same standards no matter what. Nobody should be above the law.
 

Runwildboys

Confused about stuff
Messages
49,952
Reaction score
93,680
CowboysZone DIEHARD Fan
Sadly, it is true, but everyone should be held to the same standards no matter what. Nobody should be above the law.
True, and if we know all the facts, then based on those facts he should be found guilty of manslaughter. But he isn't the sole person responsible.

In this day and age, there really seems like there's no reason to use an actual working weapon on a movie set.
 

nobody

Well-Known Member
Messages
10,362
Reaction score
18,440
True, and if we know all the facts, then based on those facts he should be found guilty of manslaughter. But he isn't the sole person responsible.

In this day and age, there really seems like there's no reason to use an actual working weapon on a movie set.

Thank you for agreeing that I should be above the law.
 

Pass2Run

Well-Known Member
Messages
10,870
Reaction score
12,220
So, I watched all of the video interrogations. They are going to get let off, it looks like. At least for anything intentional. The detective all but tells them that at the end. But she says it's up to the prosecutor to decide whether or not anyone faces charges for being negligent. Just because there wasn't intent, doesn't mean somebody can't be responsible for a crime.

Personally, I think the person who furnished the bullets, along with the armorer and her dad, are all culpable. And I still think there was some collaboration as far as it being somehow intentional. But I can't prove it.

EDIT: Baldwin was charged with involuntary manslaughter, which is pretty serious.

LINK: https://www.cnn.com/2023/01/31/entertainment/alec-baldwin-charges-rust/index.html
 

gtb1943

Well-Known Member
Messages
2,608
Reaction score
2,634
True, and if we know all the facts, then based on those facts he should be found guilty of manslaughter. But he isn't the sole person responsible.

In this day and age, there really seems like there's no reason to use an actual working weapon on a movie set.
I have a blank firing Thompson Submachine gun; configured in the style of the Chicago Typewriter. It is visually identical to the real thing; fires special blank cartridges; a very small hole in the barrel allows some smoke and fire to emerge; making it look quite real. BUT there is no way a live rd can be fired from it; the metal is too soft to withstand the pressure and it would blow up even if you could fit a live round in it; which due to the special design there is not a live round in the world that would fit it. It is even fully automatic; so it would sound very much like the actual weapon.

This is 20 years old. The company that makes it can make any cartridge weapon ever made like that.

AND it is not that expensive; about $2000 and the ammo is about $3 a round. That is what it would cost for a movie or tv show to be COMPLETELY SAFE.

Alec Baldwin as one of the executive producers shares in the responsibility that this did not happen on that set.

Negligence does not need intent to be proven.
 

lukin2006

Well-Known Member
Messages
11,956
Reaction score
19,274
He’s everything wrong with these celebrities…too stupid to take responsibility. I got no use for hollyweird celebrities these people are awful human beings.
 

gtb1943

Well-Known Member
Messages
2,608
Reaction score
2,634
The Ukrainian parents and sister of cinematographer Halyna Hutchins filed a lawsuit on Thursday against Alec Baldwin and the producers of “Rust” in connection with her death in October 2021.

Attorney Gloria Allred announced the lawsuit at a press conference at her office on Thursday morning.

https://variety.com/2023/film/news/halyna-hutchins-parents-lawsuit-sister-gloria-allred-1235518222/
They really could have done better as regards getting a celebrity attorney.
 

SuspectCorner

Still waiting...
Messages
9,718
Reaction score
2,376
My understanding is that they had a firearms specialist on the set - why are THEY not the liable party?
 
Top