Alec Baldwin Charged
-
The judge. "You were the armorer. You alone are responsible for turning a safe weapon into a lethal weapon. But for you, a husband would have his wife, and a little boy his mother."
Note, this is the same prosecutor who is teeing up the Baldwin case.
And that will be before the same judge.
ETA: Go to 2:07.
Link to video@George-K said in Alec Baldwin Charged:
The judge. "You were the armorer. You alone are responsible for turning a safe weapon into a lethal weapon. But for you, a husband would have his wife, and a little boy his mother."
Note, this is the same prosecutor who is teeing up the Baldwin case.
And that will be before the same judge.
ETA: Go to 2:07.
Link to videoAgain, I think it goes worse for him as the producer than it would if he was just the actor.
-
@George-K said in Alec Baldwin Charged:
@Mik said in Alec Baldwin Charged:
Well, it's kind of a 'you had ONE JOB' scenario.
Actually, she had two jobs - she was also on the crew that took care of props other than firearms. One of her arguments (faulty as it was) is that there was too much pressure to do everything properly and safely.
That she would even have allowed live ammunition on a movie set is pretty unbelievable.
Still unanswered is how that happened. She claims to have been unaware, though there are multiple reports of cast and crew enjoying "extracurricular" shooting with live ammo. But, you're right it was her job to make sure the gun was safe. She was not on set when the gun was handed to Baldwin. Someone else did that (a woman named "Zachary," iirc) who ended up testifying for the state.
Whoa, wait, she wasn’t even on set the day the shooting happened? And she was found guilty? Oh shit, that makes it worse for Baldwin…
@LuFins-Dad said in Alec Baldwin Charged:
Whoa, wait, she wasn’t even on set the day the shooting happened? And she was found guilty? Oh shit, that makes it worse for Baldwin…
She was "on set" in the sense that she was in the vicinity. But, iirc, when the pistol was handed to Baldwin she had to go to the bathroom. She did not hand him the gun.
Baldwin was handed one of three prop guns by assistant director David Halls that were set up in a cart by an armorer for the movie “Rust.”
Halls did not know there were live rounds in the gun, the affidavit said.
Halls took a plea deal - 6 months probation.
-
@Renauda said in Alec Baldwin Charged:
I would say the judge is doing her job in accordance to the responsibilities her job entails and bestows upon her.
I watched most of the trial, or at least the nightly summaries.
-
Gutierrez's attorney was a doofus. He was incompetent and unengaged. The witnesses he called were worse than useless - they damage her case. During the police interview prior to trial he sat like a turd, and NEVER intervened ("Don't answer that").
-
The DA, Morrissey, was really excellent. She's a barracuda with a keen mind and never, ever, lets go. She used to be a public defender, and she knows the ropes.
-
The judge was a hard-ass.
Like I said, the judge and the DA will be there in July for Baldwin.
My opinion? He's guilty as well.
-
-
Is there an established narrative for how the live ammo got onto set and into the prop gun? tl;dr version?
@Horace said in Alec Baldwin Charged:
Is there an established narrative for how the live ammo got onto set and into the prop gun? tl;dr version?
No.
One theory is that Gutierrez got the ammo in a box from a supplier in LA. In the box, apparently, there were dummy rounds, blanks, and live rounds.
That box DID make it to the set.
@Renauda said:
he was manager in charge who handled the weapon and pulled the trigger
And the state's bar for proving guilt is pretty low:
- Did he point the gun at Hitchens?
- Did he pull the trigger?
- Was there a live round in the pistol?
- Was she killed?
That's it. They have no other burden than those simple things.
As I mentioned, New Mexico Supreme Court has, in the past, ruled that "I didn't know it was loaded" is not a valid defense.
-
@Mik said in Alec Baldwin Charged:
. No mens rea. Baldwin had every expectation that the gun was safe.
Mens rea has nothing to do with it. If he had known the gun was unsafe, he would either not have fired it (in a scene where there was no camera rolling, by the way), or be on trial for murder, not homicide.
"Now look here, you Baltic gas passer... " - Mik, 6/14/08
The saying, "Lite is just one damn thing after another," is a gross understatement. The damn things overlap.
-
@Mik said in Alec Baldwin Charged:
. No mens rea. Baldwin had every expectation that the gun was safe.
Mens rea has nothing to do with it. If he had known the gun was unsafe, he would either not have fired it (in a scene where there was no camera rolling, by the way), or be on trial for murder, not homicide.
@George-K said in Alec Baldwin Charged:
@Mik said in Alec Baldwin Charged:
. No mens rea. Baldwin had every expectation that the gun was safe.
Mens rea has nothing to do with it. If he had known the gun was unsafe, he would either not have fired it (in a scene where there was no camera rolling, by the way), or be on trial for murder, not homicide.
I think it does.
“I am fond of pigs. Dogs look up to us. Cats look down on us. Pigs treat us as equals.” ~Winston S. Churchill
-
-
@George-K said in Alec Baldwin Charged:
@Mik said in Alec Baldwin Charged:
. No mens rea. Baldwin had every expectation that the gun was safe.
Mens rea has nothing to do with it. If he had known the gun was unsafe, he would either not have fired it (in a scene where there was no camera rolling, by the way), or be on trial for murder, not homicide.
I think it does.
@Mik said in Alec Baldwin Charged:
@George-K said in Alec Baldwin Charged:
@Mik said in Alec Baldwin Charged:
. No mens rea. Baldwin had every expectation that the gun was safe.
Mens rea has nothing to do with it. If he had known the gun was unsafe, he would either not have fired it (in a scene where there was no camera rolling, by the way), or be on trial for murder, not homicide.
I think it does.
Mens Rea would be important on murder 1-3 charges, but not on involuntary homicide charges. These are charges based on negligence, not intent.
-
The drunk driver doesn't plan on killing anyone, but can be found criminally liable.
"Now look here, you Baltic gas passer... " - Mik, 6/14/08
The saying, "Lite is just one damn thing after another," is a gross understatement. The damn things overlap.
-
@George-K said in Alec Baldwin Charged:
The drunk driver doesn't plan on killing anyone, but can be found criminally liable.
As in most things, I'm not in any way an expert, but couldn't somebody argue that Baldwin's case is closer to somebody servicing his car and failing to attach the brakes correctly? Is the fact that a movie gun was supplied with live rounds really be something he should be expected to predict?
I was only joking
-
@George-K said in Alec Baldwin Charged:
The drunk driver doesn't plan on killing anyone, but can be found criminally liable.
As in most things, I'm not in any way an expert, but couldn't somebody argue that Baldwin's case is closer to somebody servicing his car and failing to attach the brakes correctly? Is the fact that a movie gun was supplied with live rounds really be something he should be expected to predict?
@Doctor-Phibes said in Alec Baldwin Charged:
Is the fact that a movie gun
It's not a "movie gun." It's a real pistol.
he should be expected to predict?
Yes. Watch the video that I posted. He knew it was a real gun. He cocked the hammer and pulled the trigger...in a scene that was not being filmed. They were blocking it.
Also, the SAG code of conduct (or whatever it's called) states that in the case of firearms on the set, the ultimate responsibility lies with the person holding the weapon. That's not a legal argument, but it's something that Baldwin, as a member of the SAG, should be aware of.
-
Can we just go ahead and agree that always assuming a real gun is loaded without personally proving otherwise is a good idea?
-
Can we just go ahead and agree that always assuming a real gun is loaded without personally proving otherwise is a good idea?
@Aqua-Letifer said in Alec Baldwin Charged:
Can we just go ahead and agree that always assuming a real gun is loaded without personally proving otherwise is a good idea?
Well yeah, we're also always told to never ever point a gun at anybody except in self-defence even when it isn't loaded, but this is a movie, and they have to point guns at each other.
I guess we'll see what happens in court.
I was only joking
