Alec Baldwin

If you review the recent history of this case…the prosecutor who originally indicted Baldwin then ran from it…tried to appoint a state rep to handle it…which was illegal…then it went back to the original prosecutor. Then she fled again and two experienced prosecutors took it over, sized up the facts/law…then dumped it.
 

Alec Baldwin charged with involuntary manslaughter for a second time over fatal ‘Rust’ shooting

Alec Baldwin has been charged with involuntary manslaughter over the fatal shooting on the set of “Rust” for a second time.

The actor has been indicted by a grand jury in New Mexico over the death of cinematographer Halyna Hutchins, who was struck with a live bullet that had been loaded into a prop gun for a scene, which was being rehearsed in October 2021 during filming of the ill-fated Western.

“The above named defendant did cause the death of Halyna Hutchins by an act committed with the total disregard of indifference for the safety of others,” the indictment obtained by The Post read.
 
My stance hasn’t changed. I don’t think he should be locked up for this. Imagine if you took your car to a mechanic and he botched your breaks, then you accidentally crash and kill someone. That’s not your fault
 
My stance hasn’t changed. I don’t think he should be locked up for this. Imagine if you took your car to a mechanic and he botched your breaks, then you accidentally crash and kill someone. That’s not your fault
I don't believe he'll get locked up even if convicted. Your scenario isn't really relevant though. You'd expect a car to act as if the vehicle normally performs. A gun is a weapon and expected to perform as such. That's why there's so many safety procedures in place to prevent accidental discharges. One of them being that it's up to each individual handling the gun to properly check to make sure the weapon is safe. You are to assume that the weapon is live until check is performed.
 
I don't believe he'll get locked up even if convicted. Your scenario isn't really relevant though. You'd expect a car to act as if the vehicle normally performs. A gun is a weapon and expected to perform as such. That's why there's so many safety procedures in place to prevent accidental discharges. One of them being that it's up to each individual handling the gun to properly check to make sure the weapon is safe. You are to assume that the weapon is live until check is performed.
But it wasn’t supposed to be a gun, it was a prop. And the person in charge of handling weapons on set, is the Armorer. That “person” was a DEI hire.

 
But it wasn’t supposed to be a gun, it was a prop. And the person in charge of handling weapons on set, is the Armorer. That “person” was a DEI hire.

It's a regular gun which was supposed to be modified. It being called a "prop" means nothing by legal definition
 
It's a regular gun which was supposed to be modified. It being called a "prop" means nothing by legal definition
It’s for prop use. It’s not meant to be used as a regular gun. I get it, Baldwin is an a hole, but I don’t see how this was his fault.
 
Would you want this person in charge of gun safety on your job site?

1706484127201.png
 
Would you want this person in charge of gun safety on your job site?

View attachment 53602

You mean in La-La Land? She blends right in with the other whippersnappers out there.

The question is, if you know she's qualified and experienced as an armorer (she seems to have the necessary pedigree, BTW), why wouldn't you want her on a movie production job site? It's not like she's working in fast food. 😁
 
It’s for prop use. It’s not meant to be used as a regular gun. I get it, Baldwin is an a hole, but I don’t see how this was his fault.
The doesn't change the fact that by legal definition, it was a legal gun. Which should've been considered live until HE deemed it safe.
 
.
Top