It won’t save him from a civil lawsuit.
Baldwins are above the law.
Saw a couple headlines. He say he did nothing wrong.
He’s just a victim in all of this
Piece of schiff actor is acting the role his PR team and lawyers have written for him
Regardless, that ain’t gonna play in the Civil suits
Honest officer, just because I was driving fast while texting, that doesn’t really mean I killed that girl crossing the street when I drove over her.
I’ve been wondering how many live rounds might have been in the cylinder. If what he’s saying is true, the hammer was resting on one. If he’d fully cocked the hammer, it would have rotated the cylinder to what kind of round? Looks like it’s going to be laid to incompetence on the armorer’s part, or sabotage.
Has anyone determined if this was a replica/prop gun, or was it a genuine antique?
“I didn’t know the gun was loaded. I just pulled the hammer back and let go of it. I didn’t actually shoot it. It just went off.”
Sounds like premeditated murder to me.
he must have terrible lawyers to let him give these types of interviews and still rep him.
Alec Baldwin is big arrogant wuss, always was, and he's going down big time.
Even his Hollywood 'friends' won't help him.
He doth protest too much.
He “let go of the hammer on the gun, and the gun goes off” is what happens, you idiot, if you “let go of the hammer” incorrectly.
He must of skipped the day of firearms training where they describes how something goes out of “the dangerous end.” Just another example of an ignorant, blowhard, antigun moron handling a firearm without knowing anything about them.
All we need to know is that he thinks he’s not responsible for the shooting, but anybody else, that ever used a firearm for whatever purpose, should be locked up and have the key thrown away.
But not him . . .
He doesn’t have to be charged criminally for the dozen or so potential lawsuit complainants to get his $60M estimates say he has. More power to them.
Involuntary Manslaughter/Negligent Homicide when?!
Sounds like the single action worked exactly the way it is supposed to.
Party member discount.
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.
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.