Alec Baldwin just shot and KILLED a woman on a movie set

Armstronglivs wrote:

Big Card wrote:

"The attorney called Baldwin's actions on set "reckless and irresponsible." He was referring to the actor pointing the gun during a scene rehearsal and pulling the trigger. Dordick claimed Baldwin should not have assumed the gun was safe and checked it himself."

Baldwin didn't "assume" the gun was safe - he was explicitly told the gun was safe. That was the job of professionals. Dordick is seeking to deflect blame from an armorer who failed to check the gun was safe - which is what she was paid to do. And Baldwin has not been charged with a "reckless and irresponsible act". Nothing.

nor has anyone else. At some point that may change.

fada tyme wrote:

Armstronglivs wrote:

Baldwin didn't "assume" the gun was safe - he was explicitly told the gun was safe. That was the job of professionals. Dordick is seeking to deflect blame from an armorer who failed to check the gun was safe - which is what she was paid to do. And Baldwin has not been charged with a "reckless and irresponsible act". Nothing.

nor has anyone else. At some point that may change.

If it does the facts will have to change, especially for Baldwin. Negligence begins with the required safety standards on the set and how these were exercised - or not. The armorer who role it was to ensure the guns were not armed is central to analysis, and then the assistant producer who, relying on her to do her job, declared the gun "cold" - safe. He, too, should probably have checked before making that assurance. If it is deemed that Baldwin was entitled to trust that they had ensured the safety of the weapon once they had put it in his possession his actions in handling the gun without further checking it - while regrettable in hindsight - would be less likely to attain the bar set for gross negligence. There may be findings of lapses in safety standards on the set but these will not necessarily result in criminal prosecutions.

George Clooney didn't have much good to say about any aspect of this production, from the producers, through the armorer, all the way to Baldwin.

https://www.cnn.com/2021/11/16/entertainment/george-clooney-rust-shooting/index.html

"Why, for the life of me, this low-budget film with producers who haven't produced anything wouldn't have hired for the armorer someone with experience," Clooney said. "Maybe they weren't even using that gun to do target practice, but they had live ammo with dummies in her pack and that is insane."

"Every single time I'm handed a gun on set, I look at it, I open it, I show it to the person I'm pointing it to, we show it to the crew," he said. "Every single take you hand it back to the armorer when you're done, and you do it again... Open the gun, look down the barrel, look in the cylinder, make sure... Every time I get handed a six gun, you point it at the ground and you fire. You squeeze it six times. Always."

The gun shot was not in the script according to the Rust script supervisor.

Re Clooney: Brandon Lee was a personal friend of his. Lee's being killed on set lead to take extra precautions. Those extras should be part of a new standard for use of any gun on set. CGI can be used to add gunfire after a scene is shot. As I understand it, normal gunfire in daylight does not provide movie acceptable smoke and flash. Duds are specially designed to add smoke and flash. Stop that nonsense and require CGI to add in the "proper" amount of smoke and flash.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/kimberleespeakman/2021/11/17/rust-script-supervisor-claims-firing-of-gun-was-not-in-script-for-scene-that-led-to-fatal-shooting/?sh=7e90ddd56019

Baldwin will go to prison.

mr clooney should poast on lrc

American and proud wrote:

Baldwin will go to prison.

You are going to be disappointed.

Never met him so I have no emotional attachment to the case like you liberals always do. But he will be found guilty and he will also pay a hefty sum.

Ncaa ruler wrote:

Never met him so I have no emotional attachment to the case like you liberals always do. But he will be found guilty and he will also pay a hefty sum.

It takes a lot of gusto for prosecutor(s) to criminally charge a famous 60 million dollar man. Most city & county prosecutors are used to kicking six different kind of dog sh!t out of county public defenders. Going up against a person of interest who will have great attorneys is a different story. If a 20 year old on Rust movie set, a person with no fame and no money, maybe you would be correct. Ask yourself: If Baldwin were criminally charged with murder, would you rather be prosecutor or would you rather be defense attorney? Answer: If Baldwin is criminally charged with murder, the better job, defense attorney.

Armstronglivs wrote:

Big Card wrote:

"The attorney called Baldwin's actions on set "reckless and irresponsible." He was referring to the actor pointing the gun during a scene rehearsal and pulling the trigger. Dordick claimed Baldwin should not have assumed the gun was safe and checked it himself."

Baldwin didn't "assume" the gun was safe - he was explicitly told the gun was safe. That was the job of professionals. Dordick is seeking to deflect blame from an armorer who failed to check the gun was safe - which is what she was paid to do. And Baldwin has not been charged with a "reckless and irresponsible act". Nothing.

I wonder if that line of defense holds up in court: "Some dude told me it's ok to murder my coworker".

You mean because the defense attorney will be making about 20 times more money?

SDSU Aztec wrote:

takes a lot of gusto to criminally charge a 60 ... wrote:

It takes a lot of gusto for prosecutor(s) to criminally charge a famous 60 million dollar man. Most city & county prosecutors are used to kicking six different kind of dog sh!t out of county public defenders. Going up against a person of interest who will have great attorneys is a different story. If a 20 year old on Rust movie set, a person with no fame and no money, maybe you would be correct. Ask yourself: If Baldwin were criminally charged with murder, would you rather be prosecutor or would you rather be defense attorney? Answer: If Baldwin is criminally charged with murder, the better job, defense attorney.

You mean because the defense attorney will be making about 20 times more money?

Most likely Baldwin is going to be a Respondent in civil court in this matter. Baldwin will write a check. On another thread, we can debate the size of an out of court settlement. If Baldwin were to be criminally charged, with the good to great attorneys he will hire, Baldwin will most likely win in criminal court. It does not end up well for state & county prosecutors who go up against famous and wealthy people and lose. Federal court is a different story. Federal prosecutors rarely lose.

If anyone takes the time to read the New Mexico statutes and the requirements for even a charge, there is zero chance Baldwin would be charged with any level of murder or manslaughter. The only charge he could possibly face is the rather low level charge of reckless handling of a firearm which is a misdemeanor.

Thank goodness he is not guilty.

Armpitstrong wrote:

Thank goodness he is not guilty.

But he is guilty on Letsrun, which strangely counts for nothing in a court of law.

Armstronglivs wrote:

Armpitstrong wrote:

Thank goodness he is not guilty.

But he is guilty on Letsrun, which strangely counts for nothing in a court of law.

What are you referring to? From what I understand, there is an ongoing investigation with some "controversy" surrounding Baldwin's cellphone and that nothing has gone to court.

He is not guilty until found guilty. So he is not guilty.

Armpitstrong wrote:

He is not guilty until found guilty. So he is not guilty.

You're getting ahead of yourself. He hasn't been charged with anything.