Alec Baldwin Says He’s Been Told It’s ‘Highly Unlikely” He’ll Be Criminally Charged In ‘Rust’ On-Set Shooting – Update (Baldwin admits cocking the pistol, releasing the hammer)

Deadline ^ | 12/2/2021 | Ted Johnson

[Luke21]

Party member discount.

[JD_UTDallas]

Do you even know what extenuating circumstances is. You can do things on a movie set you can’t do in normal life I listed one. Go point a gun at some with blanks pull the trigger. Enjoy your stay in lock up. Go on set as an actor do the same thing go enjoy beers and pizza later.

What you lack is there must be criminal negligence to charge someone. That is not present here. The responsibility for ensuring a cold gun is the armors not the actor. While tragic this falls on the armor who loaded live rounds into a prop gun and then declared it a cold gun. There is no way for the actor to know nor should they be expected to know if a weapons cold. Blanks and real rounds look familiar to un trained eyes that’s why you have trained professionals on set. He won’t be charged criminally that.much you.can bank on there is no precedence for it. Civil cases take no grand jury so yeah sue away but it’s going to be hard to convince a jury that he was personally negligent when it is not his responsibility to verify he was holding a cold gun. In addition that he was following detailed instructions on where and how to point the weapon and how to actuate the hammer. There would be a reasonable expectation that with you.finger off the trigger that a gun will not fire while manipulating the hammer Th at holds true for 99.9% of all firearms and absolutely would be a factor in a civil case. Like I said I would be surprised if the 20 something armor knew that a single action revolver from the 1860 will fire just by manipulating the hammer. Sorry he won’t be charged let alone convicted. Good day.

[Magnum44]

You can do things on a movie set you can’t do in normal life

Tell that to a jury instructed to look at the law. Better yet, you can be Alex's attorney. Then a proper outcome is assured.

[JD_UTDallas]

“Balwin handled the gun without knowing the state of the gun (loaded/unloaded) knowing it WAS a real gun and COULD kill someone. He then went on to cock hammer/release hammer/pull trigger (pick whatever you like) while the gun was pointed at the chest of the dead victim, knowing it WAS a real gun and COULD kill someone. That is the very definition of negligence.”

On a movie set all that is the responsibility of the armor that has been held in court on a number of occasions I’m sorry you can’t understand that. He was handed a certified cold gun. He has no legal responsibility to double check that from the armor frankly he lacks the skills to do so and the law is on his side on that he can simply say I was handed a certified cold gun by my licenced armor and it was declared cold.

Further he was under active instructions on where to point that declared cold gun and to.manipulate the mechanisms again as an actor following instructions he is under guidance. I will up my bet to a grand I’m not a poor I spend more on craps in a day. He won’t be charged let alone convicted.

[Magnum44]

Sure. Whatever. Find the exception for movie sets in the law and show me please. Everything you cite might apply to a civil case. It has very little bearing compared to law in a criminal case.

Personally, I think he will be charged and likely convicted. Unfortunately, like Smollett we will have to wait three or four years for this process to occur.

[Mr Rogers]

I’ve read elsewhere that this particular replica gun DID have a transfer bar, so it could ONLY fire if the trigger was pulled. Of course, just because I read it doesn’t make it so. But it would take the cops about 2 seconds to figure it out...

[Trailerpark Badass]

Uh no, blanks look nothing like real rounds. Most are crimped, and it’s obvious there is no projectile in the cartridge. Perhaps you meant to say dummy round? Even those are easily distinguished from live ammo by the visibly obvious lack of a primer.

[Billthedrill]

So he admits to cocking the hammer and obviously to pointing the gun at the victims because it didn’t point itself. But he didn’t pull the trigger. He says. If I’m sitting on the jury I have to be wondering why that even matters.

[JD_UTDallas]

Again you have to prove willful negligence. Given the fact that there is a precedence and expectation that when handed a cold gun on set that the weapon is cold you are not going to get even a grand jury to true bill let alone to a DA and court room. Not happening sorry his attorneys I’m sure are competent this won’t get past the grand jury. That armor is going to face negligence charges for sure. If every barely educated high school drop out actor had to personally verify every scene every take and every weapon the industry would collapse that’s why professional and in some states licenced armors handle the legal responsibility of prop weapons which are real guns used as props. Actors lack the skills to do so and the legal system doesn’t expect them to do the job of an armor.

If you are handed a rental car and told it’s in working order then drive off the lot and hit the brakes while a mother and child are crossing the street and they fail are you guilty of vehicular manslaughter. The law says you are since you didn’t stop you and not hit them. Did You had the responsibility to get under the car and ensure the brakes were not leaking fluids. No of course not you had the expectation that the vehicle provided too you and checked by the agency would work.

What about the surgeon who is doing an operation and he is handed tools to the surgery by a tech who’s responsibility is to clean them a.d sterilize them. The patient dies 48 hours later due to septic shock as the tools were not serialized. Is there a legal expectation that the surgeon sterilize his tools. No he has the expectation that tools handed to him are up to standards.he is not guilty of negligent malpractice.

Point is professionals have a legal expectation of tools they use when provided to them by a responsible third party.

[FLT-bird]

He

- breaks safety rule #1 by not checking to see that the gun was not loaded

- breaks safety rule #2 by pointing the gun at something he was not prepared to destroy.

- breaks safety rule #3 by failing to keep his finger out of the trigger mechanism. For extra style points he even cocks the hammer first!

- breaks safety rule #4 by failing to check what was behind the target

But he’s not responsible and/or not likely to be charged? Only in a corrupt jurisdiction. He is obviously fully responsible for killing a woman and wounding the director standing behind her.

[JD_UTDallas]

Older blank rounds particularly low pressure black powder era rounds can and do have cardboard and wax sealed fronts that are flat and look very similar to wad cutters of the same era rimmed shells. Crimps are to keep same over all outer dimensions so semi automatics will feed them from a magazine. Those are actually more dangerous to shoot at someone since it’s not uncommon for a petal or two to come off and shoot out the end of the gun. Thin paper and wax is disintegrated by the heat and pressure. This is the reason in the service before they went to blue.sim rounds you.never shot blanks directly at someone.

[Magnum44]

Again you have to prove willful negligence.

I dont see 'willful' in the law. I see negligence. End of story. Your car story isnt an anolagy. There was nothing wrong with Baldwins firearm. Same with the other analogy.

I ask again, why are you on the crusade to exonerate Arec?

[Magnum44]

You and I are familiar with the same thing with respect to dummy rounds and their empty primer pocket or orange/yellow fake plastic primer. I was surprised at the beginning of this shooting fiasco that pictures of what looked like cartridges with metal (fake?) primers and a hole drilled in the side of the case were being shown. With what you and I are familiar, one could easily see if the loaded cartridge was a dummy or not. With a dummy round that can only be checked by looking at a hole in the side of the case, one would have to remove each round to check.

[JD_UTDallas]

This is the legal definition of negligence.

failure to use reasonable care, resulting in damage or injury to another.

The process to ensure you don’t commit negligence is due diligence.

The due diligence here is the weapon was handed to him by the certified armor, declared a cold gun. That is due diligence he has not the skills nor the responsibility to second guess that. He does have the reasonable expectation that the prop he was handed is safe to use. This expectation is due to the armor and the director both concurring and certified that prop was a cold gun. Since he lacks the credentials skills and responsibility to second guess the professional armor he completed his due diligence. He took reasonable care by following the protocol on set. Further more he was under active instructions from the director and photographer on where,how,when,and at what angles to point that prop. Then also under instruction he manipulated the hammer all that is reasonable care. Zero of that is negligent. It’s tragic that the armor didn’t do their job. Obviously he is broken up about it for all we know they could have been friend’s. It’s 100% just by looking at the reaction a surprise it went off. He certainly didn’t know that hammer could set it off and likely and the armor didn’t either.

There is no way a grand jury can discount the due diligence on set it’s simply not his job,he lacks the skills to do so. Props are tools he was handed a faulty tool. That dumb armor needs her firearms licence revoked. It’s wrong to string someone up who had no responsibility nor skills to know the difference.

I would bet I could hand my 1865 45 colt to most people here with wad cutters in it and the other one with flat front blanks and half wouldn’t be able to tell me without opening the gun which breaks the chain of custody which has real bullets into just looking up the cylinder they would look nearly identical. Then I’d say ok cock that hammer and then let it go. Fully half the rednecks here would discharge a round of bet real money on it.

[Magnum44]

failure to use reasonable care, resulting in damage or injury to another.

Seems to define exactly what Alex is guilty of. But you have to use the legal definition:

A. Negligent use of a deadly weapon consists of: (3) endangering the safety of another by handling or using a firearm or other deadly weapon in a negligent manner;

He is guilty of (3) for sure.

You want to argue that due diligence is satisfied by a third party. I dont buy that and I dont think a jury would either, given the law.

As has been published for some time now, People had warned of unsafe practices on set. People had left work for same reason. Temps were brought in because people left for safety concerns. The 'armorer' wasnt the person who handed Alex the gun....on and on as the story changes to obscure the fact that the person with the gun is responsible.

You are entitled to the facts. You are not entitled to your own facts.

There is no way a grand jury can discount the due diligence on set it’s simply not his job...

He may lack the skills, but its still his job.

That dumb armor needs her firearms licence revoked.

No argument there.

It’s wrong to string someone up who had no responsibility nor skills to know the difference.

I am sure the family of the dead wife and mother appreciate your sympathy for Alex.

The remainder of your post is irrelevant.

[JD_UTDallas]

You haven’t even come close to the negligence prerequisite. Third party due diligence is well established precedence. All you hypothetical charges rely on the proof of negligence. You must prove without the shadow of a doubt he was legally and I will point to the definition again that he didn’t take reasonable care in his actions. He is innocent until the DA proves him guilty of negligence. He does have proof of exactly the opposite that he had a reasonable expectation that the weapon that was handed to him a cold gun. He has reasonable expectation that the armor and the director both did their due diligence and verified that the prop was a cold gun. He again had reasonable expectation that when the verbal and public call or cold gun on set is done that the prop was indeed a cold gun. The DA must prove that he didn’t take reasonable care in his actions when he was also being instructed on those actions performing a professional task under directions from amother staff member. Come on Mr conservative innocent until proven guilty right. Prove he lacked the reasonable care. He didn’t have the legal responsibility to certify that weapon as cold. He said as much in his interview he is right. He also doesn’t expect to be charged his very expensive and much better attorney that you came to the same conclusion there is little to no way to prove negligence willful or not. Due diligence was done on multiple levels. I love America innocent until the states struggles to prove you guilty. A very high bar indeed and one every American should be happy for. Trying to convince 12 people that after all those steps and due diligence was taken that someone not legally responsible for,tasked with nor skilled with should second guess their professional armor and director on set is a VERY high bar to reach and you need to then prove beyond a reasonable doubt that he didn’t take the reasonable care someone in his shoes would take. Good luck with that.

[Magnum44]

I showed you law. You have only spouted opinion. Show me some legal basis and I can have a discussion with you. Otherwise you are just blathering.

You must prove without the shadow of a doubt...

Hogwash. Thats a standard for willfull homicide, murder. Not negligent homicide.

Sure, he is innocent until found guilty - in a courtroom. In the public, he is whatever conclusion you come to based on what you see and here. In this case Alec has strung himself up two or three time already.

[Trailerpark Badass]

So, the average person can’t tell lead from wax? The simple fact is that any supposedly grown man who takes the word of a 23 year-old tatted-up TikTok skank that the gun is safe, and then shoots at someone, is not a responsible adult. Baldwin is a punk. I check and clear any gun that’s handed to me, even if the sales clerk just cleared it in front of me. The idea that guns are some magical, mysterious technology, that is beyond the understanding of the average person, is a leftist trope.

[Chicory]

First, please, more commas and paragraphs! I am not a grammar nazi or anything, but your posts are hard to read due to these lacks.

Second, I read in England an armorer has to have a special license, obtained after special training, to handle firearms for filming and plays.

This should be an absolute prerequisite in the US! Putting a young woman who is unsure of her abilities with firearms in was a Really Stupid Idea!