Alec Baldwin

[LumRaiderFan]

13 minutes ago, tvc184 said:

I’m not positive, but I’m fairly certain that the FBI was not involved nor has any interest in this case except at the request of the state DA for a lab test. It isn’t a federal crime.

 The DA is merely trying to cover all their bases.

It is obvious that Baldwin pulled the trigger. I have shot a few of those types of single action revolvers and they can have what people call a hair trigger. It is extremely easy on some firearms to fire the shot accidentally by merely touching the trigger. Been there, done that… with the muzzle being pointed in a safe direction.

So was it an accident and he didn’t intend to shoot? Does he think that he didn’t intentionally pull the trigger? Is he only lying to look more innocent in the public?

 The DA wanted to know and/or prove that the weapon could not be fired by dropping it, bumping it, etc.

It depends on their state laws but in Texas as an example, merely pointing a firearm and someone ,even if you believe it is unloaded, is a crime. It is called Deadly Conduct.

I believe that the main question will come down to, did Baldwin know that he was holding a real firearm capable of firing real bullets or did he reasonably believe that it was a prop gun and could only fire blanks or not at all?

I have no idea how they will prosecute this case but I have seen some articles that suggested that the indictment was based partly on the fact that Baldwin hired a person who was unqualified to be the armorer. That may be true, however, does that make him culpable of a crime?

If a Chief Of Police hires a police officer and two months later the officer makes a horrible mistake and kills an innocent person, does the chief go to jail for murder? Suing the police department and the chief is understandable for negligent hiring or negligent retention. That is far different than charging the police chief with murder when he/she was no part of the incident.

Is it normal for actors to be handed a non-firing weapon by a person hired to do exactly that? Is it standard that the actor to always then inspect the gun and fake bullets to make sure there the armorer was correct (why hire an armorer then?) or do they trust the crew? 

It might be now a new rule but was it at that time? How many times was Clint Eastwood, John Wayne, Robert Duvall, etc., given a gun that they didn’t check it?

I think people are making silly argument that, everybody that handles firearms knows that you always check it and never point somebody. That is completely true however, that is not a movie set which is basically all fake.

So beyond a reasonable doubt, did Baldwin know the he was handling a firearm (a non-firing item is not a firearm) or  maybe did he bring a real revolver onto the set and especially did he put it next to a prop gun? Then he perhaps saw a couple of guns and grabbed the wrong one? Yep, he might be guilty but I think that is the burden that the DA has to prove.

 

Myself, I don't think it's a silly argument at all to expect someone to be personally responsible for a firearm you are handling, even if you're a Hollywood elite.

I'm sure Halyna Hutchins's family would agree.

You shouldn't get to apply different rules for a crime and have no personal responsibility when you kill someone simply based on you being an actor with incompetent firearm knowledge.

But, I'm sure when it's all settled, reasonable expectations won't be applied here.

[thetragichippy]

1 hour ago, tvc184 said:

maybe did he bring a real revolver onto the set

That brings up another question I feel needs answering. How did the real bullets get on the property and who brought them.

[tvc184]

3 hours ago, LumRaiderFan said:

Myself, I don't think it's a silly argument at all to expect someone to be personally responsible for a firearm you are handling, even if you're a Hollywood elite.

I'm sure Halyna Hutchins's family would agree.

You shouldn't get to apply different rules for a crime and have no personal responsibility when you kill someone simply based on you being an actor with incompetent firearm knowledge.

But, I'm sure when it's all settled, reasonable expectations won't be applied here.

I will bring it up again, did he know it was a firearm? A fake, a prop gun, a kid’s cap pistol and an exact replica air soft gun are not firearms.

[tvc184]

2 hours ago, thetragichippy said:

That brings up another question I feel needs answering. How did the real bullets get on the property and who brought them.

That is exactly what I was talking about.

If he brought the revolver and bullets onto the set and then he grabbed the wrong one, he is likely guilty of killing someone with at least criminal negligence which is Criminally Negligent Homicide in Texas as an example. 

[tvc184]

… which is a state jail felony with a maximum sentence of two years in state jail.

NM laws could be significantly different but they probably have similar elements. 

[tvc184]

3 hours ago, LumRaiderFan said:

Myself, I don't think it's a silly argument at all to expect someone to be personally responsible for a firearm you are handling, even if you're a Hollywood elite.

I'm sure Halyna Hutchins's family would agree.

You shouldn't get to apply different rules for a crime and have no personal responsibility when you kill someone simply based on you being an actor with incompetent firearm knowledge.

But, I'm sure when it's all settled, reasonable expectations won't be applied here.

It is not different rules by profession although there are several laws based on profession.

It is a reasonable belief of a person in that position.

Look at Brandon Lee’s death.

 There was a real revolver used but it was loaded with dummy rounds. That way when the camera got a close-up shot of the front of the revolver, people would see the cartridges in the gun.

To make the dummy rounds, the armor is removed. The projectile had dumped out the powder and seed the projectile. The rounds had no powder but appeared to be a live rounds when looked at closely on camera. Of course the armorer is to remove the primer also.

Oops, he forgot!

 The actor fired the incorrectly modified dummy round and the primer which wasn’t removed, detonated and was just strong enough to push the projectile a short distance into the barrel. 

So in the next scene they removed the dummy rounds and replaced them with blanks which had a powder charge and no projectile. The actor fired the actual blank at Brandon Lee from about 15 feet. The projectile that was stuck in the barrel basically made the blank round equivalent of an actual round and it killed Lee.

 There were no convictions in Lee’s death.

 You can see where an actor is relying on someone else to properly load and check the firearms and ammo. The actor doesn’t go into a room and start disassembling bullets, pouring out powder and then reseating the rounds. They hire people to do that.

In Lee’s case the actor was supposed to be given a revolver with a blank round in it. It had a blank round all right but because of the previous screw up by the armor, it turned it into a fully functioning firearm by accident and it killed Lee.

[LumRaiderFan]

1 hour ago, tvc184 said:

It is not different rules by profession although there are several laws based on profession.

It is a reasonable belief of a person in that position.

Look at Brandon Lee’s death.

 There was a real revolver used but it was loaded with dummy rounds. That way when the camera got a close-up shot of the front of the revolver, people would see the cartridges in the gun.

To make the dummy rounds, the armor is removed. The projectile had dumped out the powder and seed the projectile. The rounds had no powder but appeared to be a live rounds when looked at closely on camera. Of course the armorer is to remove the primer also.

Oops, he forgot!

 The actor fired the incorrectly modified dummy round and the primer which wasn’t removed, detonated and was just strong enough to push the projectile a short distance into the barrel. 

So in the next scene they removed the dummy rounds and replaced them with blanks which had a powder charge and no projectile. The actor fired the actual blank at Brandon Lee from about 15 feet. The projectile that was stuck in the barrel basically made the blank round equivalent of an actual round and it killed Lee.

 There were no convictions in Lee’s death.

 You can see where an actor is relying on someone else to properly load and check the firearms and ammo. The actor doesn’t go into a room and start disassembling bullets, pouring out powder and then reseating the rounds. They hire people to do that.

In Lee’s case the actor was supposed to be given a revolver with a blank round in it. It had a blank round all right but because of the previous screw up by the armor, it turned it into a fully functioning firearm by accident and it killed Lee.

Well, I guess anytime someone gets killed in a Hollywood firearm accident, there should be no culpability because there are no expectations for personal responsibility from anyone involved.

Sounds good.

[1970]

1 hour ago, tvc184 said:

It is not different rules by profession although there are several laws based on profession.

It is a reasonable belief of a person in that position.

Look at Brandon Lee’s death.

 There was a real revolver used but it was loaded with dummy rounds. That way when the camera got a close-up shot of the front of the revolver, people would see the cartridges in the gun.

To make the dummy rounds, the armor is removed. The projectile had dumped out the powder and seed the projectile. The rounds had no powder but appeared to be a live rounds when looked at closely on camera. Of course the armorer is to remove the primer also.

Oops, he forgot!

 The actor fired the incorrectly modified dummy round and the primer which wasn’t removed, detonated and was just strong enough to push the projectile a short distance into the barrel. 

So in the next scene they removed the dummy rounds and replaced them with blanks which had a powder charge and no projectile. The actor fired the actual blank at Brandon Lee from about 15 feet. The projectile that was stuck in the barrel basically made the blank round equivalent of an actual round and it killed Lee.

 There were no convictions in Lee’s death.

 You can see where an actor is relying on someone else to properly load and check the firearms and ammo. The actor doesn’t go into a room and start disassembling bullets, pouring out powder and then reseating the rounds. They hire people to do that.

In Lee’s case the actor was supposed to be given a revolver with a blank round in it. It had a blank round all right but because of the previous screw up by the armor, it turned it into a fully functioning firearm by accident and it killed Lee.

You know more about it than I do. It's an interesting case. Out of curiosity I read through the OSHA report dated 2022-04-19, and I think there's several folks that should be charged with negligence.  But still, IMO, Baldwin was handed a gun, and he pointed it at people and pulled the trigger without first checking out the gun. Apparently it wasn't the first time. 

From the report:

19. On October 21, 2021, Dave Halls handed the 0.45 caliber Colt revolver, loaded with what he assumed were dummy rounds, to Alec Baldwin. Mr. Baldwin aimed the revolver toward Halyna Hutchins and Joel Souza and a projectile was fired, striking Ms. Hutchins and Mr. Souza.

And ...

g. Bulletin #1: Page 2, “1. Refrain from pointing a firearm at anyone… If it is absolutely necessary to do so on camera, consult the Property Master / or Armorer or other safety representative, such as the First A.D. / Stage Manager. Remember that any object at which you point a firearm could be destroyed.”

(State of New Mexico Environment Department Occupational Health and Safety Bureau 525 Camino de los Marquez, Suite 3 Santa Fe NM 87505 Phone: (505) 476-8700 Fax: (505) 476-8734 Page 9 of 11)

Failure to implement: Lane Luper stated that many camera shots had the firearms pointed and firing at the camera. Halyna Hutchins and Joel Souza were injured when a firearm was pointed in their direction, with Hutchins’ injury resulting in death. Rust management representative Dave Halls was present prior to and at the time the firearm discharged a live round, severely injuring two crew members. As Rust’s top-level management safety official, Mr. Halls did not consult with the Property Master or Armorer during or after the firearm was loaded, handed to the actor, and pointed toward crew members in order to determine that pointing the firearm at persons was “absolutely necessary.” h. Bulletin #1: Page 2, “11…firearms are to be loaded just before they are used in a scene.”

[tvc184]

3 hours ago, LumRaiderFan said:

Well, I guess anytime someone gets killed in a Hollywood firearm accident, there should be no culpability because there are no expectations for personal responsibility from anyone involved.

Sounds good.

Who said there was no culpability? You are adding 2 + 2 and trying to come up with 5.5.

It is on the state to prove beyond a reasonable doubt where that culpability lies.

Again I will rely on Texas law only as an example. It is a defense to prosecution that a reasonable belief was held by the accused if that mistake would have negated the culpability. It is called Mistake of Fact  

Sec. 8.02. MISTAKE OF FACT. (a) It is a defense to prosecution that the actor through mistake formed a reasonable belief about a matter of fact if his mistaken belief negated the kind of culpability required for commission of the offense.

So if a person “formed a reasonable belief”, if that mistake negated the culpability, it is a defense to prosecution for that accusation.

 Let’s say you are awakened at 2am by someone kicking hard on your door screaming to open the door or he is going to break the door down. You fire a shot through the door in self defense when the hinges start breaking. You stay in the house and call 911, telling the police that somebody was trying to break into your home you believed they were going to kill you or your family. Legal under Texas law? I think so.

But what happens when you find out that it was your next-door neighbor and good friend and he came home drunk and got the wrong driveway. He was mad because he thought his wife was locking him out of the house. You might have thought it was legal but you killed an innocent man who was no threat to you. While tragic, should you go to prison for the rest of your life when you thought you were complying with Texas law and your family really was in danger?

Or would you rely on a reasonable mistake of fact? 

[tvc184]

3 hours ago, 1970 said:

You know more about it than I do. It's an interesting case. Out of curiosity I read through the OSHA report dated 2022-04-19, and I think there's several folks that should be charged with negligence.  But still, IMO, Baldwin was handed a gun, and he pointed it at people and pulled the trigger without first checking out the gun. Apparently it wasn't the first time. 

From the report:

19. On October 21, 2021, Dave Halls handed the 0.45 caliber Colt revolver, loaded with what he assumed were dummy rounds, to Alec Baldwin. Mr. Baldwin aimed the revolver toward Halyna Hutchins and Joel Souza and a projectile was fired, striking Ms. Hutchins and Mr. Souza.

And ...

g. Bulletin #1: Page 2, “1. Refrain from pointing a firearm at anyone… If it is absolutely necessary to do so on camera, consult the Property Master / or Armorer or other safety representative, such as the First A.D. / Stage Manager. Remember that any object at which you point a firearm could be destroyed.”

(State of New Mexico Environment Department Occupational Health and Safety Bureau 525 Camino de los Marquez, Suite 3 Santa Fe NM 87505 Phone: (505) 476-8700 Fax: (505) 476-8734 Page 9 of 11)

Failure to implement: Lane Luper stated that many camera shots had the firearms pointed and firing at the camera. Halyna Hutchins and Joel Souza were injured when a firearm was pointed in their direction, with Hutchins’ injury resulting in death. Rust management representative Dave Halls was present prior to and at the time the firearm discharged a live round, severely injuring two crew members. As Rust’s top-level management safety official, Mr. Halls did not consult with the Property Master or Armorer during or after the firearm was loaded, handed to the actor, and pointed toward crew members in order to determine that pointing the firearm at persons was “absolutely necessary.” h. Bulletin #1: Page 2, “11…firearms are to be loaded just before they are used in a scene.”

But… did Baldwin know it was a firearm? 

Who loaded it?

Who brought live rounds onto the set?

Who handed the revolver to Baldwin and was there any statements made like the revolver was safe or wasn’t even a real weapon and a blank firing replica?

Read my comment above this one on Mistake of Fact.

I don’t know any of the answers but I think the belief that Baldwin is automatically guilty without looking at the law is a mistake.

[baddog]

If this was a rehearsal, was the scene rehearsed to where the gun is to be pointed at the cinematographer? I think not. 

[LumRaiderFan]

6 hours ago, tvc184 said:

Who said there was no culpability? You are adding 2 + 2 and trying to come up with 5.5.

It is on the state to prove beyond a reasonable doubt where that culpability lies.

Again I will rely on Texas law only as an example. It is a defense to prosecution that a reasonable belief was held by the accused if that mistake would have negated the culpability. It is called Mistake of Fact  

Sec. 8.02. MISTAKE OF FACT. (a) It is a defense to prosecution that the actor through mistake formed a reasonable belief about a matter of fact if his mistaken belief negated the kind of culpability required for commission of the offense.

So if a person “formed a reasonable belief”, if that mistake negated the culpability, it is a defense to prosecution for that accusation.

 Let’s say you are awakened at 2am by someone kicking hard on your door screaming to open the door or he is going to break the door down. You fire a shot through the door in self defense when the hinges start breaking. You stay in the house and call 911, telling the police that somebody was trying to break into your home you believed they were going to kill you or your family. Legal under Texas law? I think so.

But what happens when you find out that it was your next-door neighbor and good friend and he came home drunk and got the wrong driveway. He was mad because he thought his wife was locking him out of the house. You might have thought it was legal but you killed an innocent man who was no threat to you. While tragic, should you go to prison for the rest of your life when you thought you were complying with Texas law and your family really was in danger?

Or would you rely on a reasonable mistake of fact? 

There were no convictions in Brandon Lee's case, right?  That's what you said.

Somehow a bunch of "professionals" allowed someone to be killed by a weapon that should have been safe.

Same thing will happened with this case.

More than likely no one will be held responsible here either...no culpability.

2+2 does equal 4.

 

[tvc184]

1 hour ago, LumRaiderFan said:

There were no convictions in Brandon Lee's case, right?  That's what you said.

Somehow a bunch of "professionals" allowed someone to be killed by a weapon that should have been safe.

Same thing will happened with this case.

More than likely no one will be held responsible here either...no culpability.

2+2 does equal 4.

 

There is culpability. Who does it belong to is the question. To me no culpability means that no matter what, no one is responsible. I think there is a difference between no culpability and can culpability be proven in a particular case. Certainly the DA thinks there is culpability. 

Are all crimes solved? No. Can all crimes be proven in court? No. 

Maybe I am misunderstanding but you said that if “someone gets killed in Hollywood” there was no culpability based on “being an actor” and there should be no culpability based on “no expectations of personal responsibility”.

I have not said that nor implied it. Even an actor who is hated due to his politics stance however, has the same right to require proof of responsibility as seen by a reasonable person in his position.

[LumRaiderFan]

1 hour ago, tvc184 said:

There is culpability. Who does it belong to is the question. To me no culpability means that no matter what, no one is responsible. I think there is a difference between no culpability and can culpability be proven in a particular case. Certainly the DA thinks there is culpability. 

Are all crimes solved? No. Can all crimes be proven in court? No. 

Maybe I am misunderstanding but you said that if “someone gets killed in Hollywood” there was no culpability based on “being an actor” and there should be no culpability based on “no expectations of personal responsibility”.

I have not said that nor implied it. Even an actor who is hated due to his politics stance however, has the same right to require proof of responsibility as seen by a reasonable person in his position.

I didn't say you said no culpability, you simply said there were no convictions in Brandon lee's case and there probably won't be in this one either.

If that's true, there is no culpability in the eyes of the courts.

I look at it much simpler, you picked up a gun, pointed it at someone, pulled the trigger and killed someone.

Maybe there are others you were depending on to make sure the gun was safe, but it falls on you also.

I'm not arguing with you and I understand you are laying out "what ifs" from the legal standpoint.

[tvc184]

Trial judge ends the trial of Alec Baldwin.

 The state withheld evidence favorable to Baldwin.

Dismissal with prejudice which usually means that the case cannot be refiled. 
 

Case closed.