Legal Analysis: Alec Baldwin Situation Beginning to Look a Lot Like Manslaughter

Legal Insurrection ^ | 10-25-2021 | Andrew Branca

[Political Junkie Too]

He ordered it correctly in a numbered list further up the article.

That section you quoted was a recap of a recap of the list.

-PJ

[Az Joe]

bump

[Revel]

Nothing will happen to Baldwin. He is one of the lefts elite’s darlings.

[5th MEB]

Completely irrelevant; anyone handling a firearm for ANY REASON is fully responsible for what happens with that firearm!

Even primitive people have been demonstrated to understand that firearms are weapons designed for destroying a target or an enemy.

I don’t care if it’s a 50 megaton thermonuclear bomb, a 105 millimeter howitzer, or a sling shot; if it’s in your hands and you discharge it, YOU ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE DAMAGE IT DOES!!!!

[5th MEB]

HAIR TRIGGER??

THATS WHY YOU KEEP YOUR BOOGER HOOK OFF THE BANG SWITCH UNLESS YOU INTEND TO SHOOT!!!!

[Fido969]

I had a gun with a bad sear. It’s no joke. As soon as I saw the problem I took the gun apart.

[Fido969]

Guns are pointed at the camera for certain scenes. Those are loaded with dummy rounds. Merely pointing such a gun at the camera is itself, not a negligent act

[central_va]

An unloaded gun is nothing but an ornate club weapon.

[Fido969]

I’m just wondering why the gun went off. I don’t believe he would have pulled the trigger deliberately if he thought it was a blank round. A hair trigger, though, might result in a negligent discharge.

[Fido969]

The gun was loaded, certainly, but what was the intent? Blank or dummy rounds? Each creates a different fact pattern.

[freedumb2003]

>>Uh, no. Baldwin is a very big celebrity. Definitely an a-lister. Or, at least he was before killing his cinematographer.<<

The only thing he has done in the last 15 years was snl episodes: https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0000285/

He probably made his $ as producer of Match Game.

Definitely a C-lister who just sticks his mug out there.

[Jim W N]

You should be the prosecution’s pick for the jury.

Attorney: “Do you think he’s guilty?”
Potential Juror: “The cops arrested him didn’t they?”
Attorney: “Yes.”
Potential Juror: “Then he’s guilty.”

[Jim W N]

DWI is a strict liability crime regardless of negligence.

Acting and handling a gun is not a strict liability crime.

[TexasGator]

” Merely pointing such a gun at the camera is itself, not a negligent act”

It is when their are several people handling the camera!

[RayChuang88]

Now there is this new issue: the dead person (Halyna Hutchins) was planning to do a movie about the pedophilia problem in the movie industry. If the extenuating circumstances pan out, it could go from manslaughter for possible second-degree murder at minimum.

[bobbo666]

Oh, please. He’s a liberal. This will never go to court.

[Fido969]

Now there is this new issue: the dead person (Halyna Hutchins) was planning to do a movie about the pedophilia problem in the movie industry. If the extenuating circumstances pan out, it could go from manslaughter for possible second-degree murder at minimum.

She was not. That's fake news.

[1Old Pro]

The “experts” on The Five said no criminal charges would be filed like the Hollywood helicopter case and this would be just civil charges.

I would hope not, I think there was criminality here.

[1Old Pro]

Completely irrelevant; anyone handling a firearm for ANY REASON is fully responsible for what happens with that firearm!

I agree. Just because you're a Hollywood actor doesn't change things.

[Political Junkie Too]

I think they're wrong to compare the two cases.

In the John Landis Twilight Zone: The Movie case, it was an unfortunate series of events that led to the tragedy:

• the pyrotechnics were too strong.
• the helicopter was too low.
• the helicopter was right over the explosives when it went off.
• the debris from the explosion sheared off the tail rotor of the helicopter.

It's hard to put all of that on the director. He might have called for the helicopter to fly a little lower during the chaos of the nighttime shot, but the rest of it was a tragic accident of bad timing and being in the wrong place at the wrong time (if Morrow and the two children were just a few feet away they would have survived).

Those circumstances are very different from the Baldwin case. He was holding the gun. He was playing with it during a break in the shooting while cameras were being set up. He pulled it out of his holster and pointed it at the camera.

Even if the armorer was supposed to retrieve the gun and give it back when they were ready to record, it was still Baldwin who pointed the gun at the camera when it went off.

-PJ