Cynically maybe he was hoping more people would see it out of curiosity and banking on ticket receipts. If this movie never wraps and is shown though, that method is worthless.
Alec Baldwin
- Thread starter ruxCYtable
- Start date
Is there evidence that the pistol fired without the trigger being pulled? Other than Baldwin's insistence that he didn't.
H
Baldwin said on 60 minutes or whatever show that was, that they were practicing drawing from the holster and aiming in the direction of the camera. Eventually, he pulled the hammer back, but claims he didn't pull the trigger.
My theory is that he grasped the trigger while removing it from the holster and sloppily kept the trigger pressed the entire time. The single action colt requires that you pull the hammer back manually. You can't just pull the trigger and shoot. However, it will immediately fire if you pull the hammer back and let go with the trigger already pressed. You see this used for rapid fire in some old westerns.
That is my theory anyway, but I haven't seen any real proof of this, or anyone else pitching this theory. But my theory jives with the fact that humans malfunction far more frequently than well engineered machines do.
H
I had no idea that computerized special effects existed in 1922. Thank you for letting us know.
Almost everyone on a film set is unionized. I didn't know that didn't apply to visual effects workers.
I know this as well. Sorry, should have said "VFX Industry" instead of "that industry."
Filmmakers have been charged like this before. John Landis and others were charged with Involuntary Manslaughter many years ago filming the Twilight Zone movie. A helicopter crashed during filming that killed 3 actors (2 of them children) on the ground and injured 6 in the helicopter. However, Landis and the rest were acquitted during the trial. Landis and the production company settled out of court to avoid any sort of civil trial.
Twilight Zone accident - Wikipedia
Filmmakers have been charged like this before. John Landis and others were charged with Involuntary Manslaughter many years ago filming the Twilight Zone movie. A helicopter crashed during filming that killed 3 actors (2 of them children) on the ground and injured 6 in the helicopter. However, Landis and the rest were acquitted during the trial. Landis and the production company settled out of court to avoid any sort of civil trial.
Twilight Zone accident - Wikipedia
en.wikipedia.org
Which kind of says something, because in that case there's a lot more negligence and breaking of laws that resulted in that accident, yet it still got an acquittal.
I don't know if he should be guilty or innocent.
But someone was killed by accident. So it seems like involuntary manslaughter charges are a good place to start.
Someone being killed by accident isnt automatically a crime. People seem to think that "someone died=manslaughter" when that isn't at all the case. Sometimes accidents are just accidents. (This doesn't absolve civil liability of course!)
Manslaughter has different degrees, but in my not a lawyer reading this kind of manslaughter -where an illegal act was not occurring- you generally have to show that the person being charged was engaging in some large amount of negligence\recklessness that lead to the death. I personally find that hard to see here for Baldwin with the evidence we have seen so far (the armorer and assistant director are a different story). Baldwin was in a place where he was supposed to be able to trust a process that would ensure that the weapon he was given wasn't live. That process clearly failed due to the incompetence of the armorer\assistant director.
I agree with everything you said.
Was Baldwin the producer? Thought I read that here somewhere. Maybe they're trying to hold him ultimately responsibile. Which, as said earlier, could be self serving of the DA.
Something in the process clearly failed. Someone being found guilty of involuntary manslaughter seems reasonable.
He was, but it would seem he would avoid any criminal culpability in that sense because he followed the proper steps in hiring the employees responsible for managing a process to ensure safety. They also aren't going after the other producers.
This just seems like they got a big target in their sights so they want to go after him.
The armorer is in trouble here, as she had a responsibility to verify all types and kinds of weapons and ammo on set, and is saying the ammo supplier sent live ammo that she did not check because it was shown as clean. This is part of her job. But the protocols go way beyond that step for many obvious reasons.
Some people here seem to be saying that an actor has no responsibility for firearm safety on set. This is absolutely false. Everyone on set would have a responsibility for proper training and handling of firearms for the set-up of every shot. Forensics have determined there was nothing wrong with the gun, it was pointed at someone and the trigger pulled. There are lots of ways to do this without actually doing this, but it was done incorrectly and not in the presence of people who would know better. Baldwin IS responsible for that. That's where actor and producer culpability come into play. It can be both an accident and negligent manslaughter.
The armor, who has also been charged, is saying this scene was set up for rehearsal and she was not present at the rehearsal. That is a problem. The proper gun was not necessary at all for a rehearsal, why was it used without an armorer on set? The person who took the gun to the set is saying they did not personally verify the status of the gun but signed off on it. Nobody knows when the gun was loaded, but live ammunition was found on Baldwins belt. (This is what the prosecutor is focusing on I bet.) The armorer also has said that production resisted efforts to take time for proper training on set. Camera people had walked off the set because other safety protocols had not been followed earlier in the shooting.
It seems like the producers were crunched for time and money and careless about following multiple levels of safety protocols and somebody got killed. The fact that there is still evasiveness how the live ammo got in the gun at this point one must consider whether the DA has other evidence potentially involving Baldwin and that's what's drawing the charges IMO.
Some people here seem to be saying that an actor has no responsibility for firearm safety on set. This is absolutely false. Everyone on set would have a responsibility for proper training and handling of firearms for the set-up of every shot. Forensics have determined there was nothing wrong with the gun, it was pointed at someone and the trigger pulled. There are lots of ways to do this without actually doing this, but it was done incorrectly and not in the presence of people who would know better. Baldwin IS responsible for that. That's where actor and producer culpability come into play. It can be both an accident and negligent manslaughter.
The armor, who has also been charged, is saying this scene was set up for rehearsal and she was not present at the rehearsal. That is a problem. The proper gun was not necessary at all for a rehearsal, why was it used without an armorer on set? The person who took the gun to the set is saying they did not personally verify the status of the gun but signed off on it. Nobody knows when the gun was loaded, but live ammunition was found on Baldwins belt. (This is what the prosecutor is focusing on I bet.) The armorer also has said that production resisted efforts to take time for proper training on set. Camera people had walked off the set because other safety protocols had not been followed earlier in the shooting.
It seems like the producers were crunched for time and money and careless about following multiple levels of safety protocols and somebody got killed. The fact that there is still evasiveness how the live ammo got in the gun at this point one must consider whether the DA has other evidence potentially involving Baldwin and that's what's drawing the charges IMO.
Last edited: