Alec Baldwin Fired Prop Gun That Kills 1 on Set of 'Rust'

[iota]

Report: Alec Baldwin Fired Prop Gun That Kills 1 on Set of 'Rust'




https://www.newsmax.com/CMSPages/GetFile.aspx?guid=f848157b-9821-4a42-9deb-abafc1821840&SiteName=Newsmax&maxsidesize=600


NEWSMAX reports:

"One person died, and a second person was injured in an accidental shooting Thursday on the set of "Rust," a feature starring Alec Baldwin that was filming in New Mexico.

Fox News reported Baldwin fired the shot that killed his director of photography Halyna Hutchins, 42, and hit director Joel Souza, 42.

A 42-year-old woman died from the incident, which involved a prop firearm, the Santa Fe County Sheriff's Office said in a statement. A 42-year-old man was receiving emergency care.

"The Santa Fe County sheriff's office confirms that two individuals were shot during filming of a scene on the set of the movie western 'Rust,'" the office said in a statement. "According to investigators it appears that the scene being filmed involved the use of a prop firearm when it was discharged. Detectives are investigating how and what type of projectile was discharged."

The incident was reported at 1:50 p.m. M.T. at the Bonanza Creek Ranch, a popular filming location.

The woman was transported by helicopter to University of New Mexico Hospital in Albuquerque, where she died, the office stated. The man was taken by ambulance to Christus St. Vincent Regional Medical Center in Santa Fe.

The Sheriff's office did not identify the woman, saying that next of kin had not been notified.

Joel Souza is writing and directing the Western, which also stars Frances Fisher, Jensen Ackles, Brady Noon and Travis Fimmel. Albuquerque station KOB4's news helicopter photographed the incident, showing an old church set blocked off, and reported that set security confirmed it is on lockdown.

Baldwin is a co-producer on the film and plays infamous outlaw Rust, whose 13-year-old grandson is convicted of an accidental murder. Ackles plays a U.S. Marshal and Fimmel plays a bounty hunter who are on the pair's tail as Rust tries to break his grandson out of prison. An unexpected bond forms between the outlaw and his estranged grandson as they go on the run."

read full article here:
https://www.newsmax.com/us/alec-baldwin-prop-gun-rust/2021/10/21/id/1041535/

[Journeyman]

Fox News reported Baldwin fired the shot that killed his director of photography Halyna Hutchins, 42, and hit director Joel Souza, 42.

A 42-year-old woman died from the incident, which involved a prop firearm, the Santa Fe County Sheriff's Office said in a statement. A 42-year-old man was receiving emergency care.

This feels like one of 'those' stories. Bit like the Gabby Petito one. We have some eerie foreshadowing from Alec Baldwin:

https://storage.googleapis.com/stateless-gematriaeffect-news/2021/10/63fd711a-screen-shot-2021-10-21-at-11.59.08-pm-1200x1787.png

Then a load of coincidental numerology:
https://gematriaeffect.news/alec-baldwin-kills-cast-member-with-prop-gun-in-brandon-bruce-lee-tribute-201-days-after-his-birthday-october-21-2021/
http://themindlessfreaks.blogspot.com/2021/10/filmcrew-member-of-rust-dead-from-prop.html

[Mark (Star Mariner)]

Yesterday Baldwin tweeted a single curious word: "What?" - in response to nothing apparent. His first tweet for months.

A reply to instructions, comms? I call possible f*ckery here.

47719

[mountain_jim]

https://gab.com/threesevens




4chan "Hollywood insider" theorizes on the Baldwin shooting.

https://boards.4chan.org/pol/thread/344416847#




https://media.gab.com/system/media_attachments/files/088/471/181/original/6888688b1718af29.png


https://media.gab.com/system/media_attachments/files/088/471/186/original/6e8b59d372bb0b99.png


https://media.gab.com/system/media_attachments/files/088/471/197/original/1a1f8cf157ed9bc7.png


https://media.gab.com/system/media_attachments/files/088/471/204/original/bff4e79ada3fce88.png

[iota]

https://i.imgur.com/SJPTXTP.jpg


This is the 24 year old BLONDE responsible for
PROP GUNS on Alec Baldwin Movie

Dailymail has revealed that 24 y/o Hanna Gutierrez was the armourer responsible for the guns on set after she was brought in when the local union walked off set and she was there to replace the original prop master.

She was the one who laid out 3 prop guns on a cart out on filming location and then assistant director, Dave Halls grabbed the gun from the cart and brought it to Baldwin unaware it had live rounds.

Halls then shouted "Cold Gun" before handing it to Baldwin using the phrase to signal the cast and crew the gun was safe to fire on the scene and seconds later, Baldwin pulled the trigger that caused the fatal accident..


https://i.imgur.com/jwCSwU7.jpg

Hanna is the daughter of legendary armourer and firearms consultant Thell Reed who worked from a young age and she did not respond to dailymail for comment

The gun that was used was a Colt Pistol that was handed to Baldwin on the set of Rust and was taking part in a MOCK GUNFIGHT inside the building of the Bonzana Ranch

Jensen Ackles, Swen Temmel and Travis Hammer were also on scene as the pistol was one of several weapons on set at the time


The crew on Alec Baldwin's movie set were already concerned about gun safety before he accidentally killed cinemtographer Halyna Hutchins and injured the director, Joel Souza when the prop master in charge of the firearm that killed her had just JOINED the crew after the union walked out during the IATSE dispute!!


https://i.imgur.com/U4rA1aP.jpg


A search warrant said the assistant director handed Baldwin a gun loaded with live rounds and indicated it was "safe" to use in the moments before the fatal shooting

The warrant said a single bullet struck her chest and then the director on his shoulder as he was standing behind her suggesting it travelled all the way through her body....

Unionized workers walked off the set hours before the fatal shooting after they plained about shoddy conditions and another safety incient days earlier involving 2 misfires of a prop weapon

Yet, the unnamed prop master who oversaw the gun used in the fatal shooting was a nonunion worker who was just "brought in on the fly" to replace the workers who walked off set

Unionized employees complained they stayed overnight in Albuquerque, an hour's drive from the set and not Santa Fe because they wouldn't pay their hotels

When they showed up on set, they found out they were placed by LOCALS as it begs the question who those locals were and what training did they have before handing Baldwin the weapon

The gun also had 2 misfires in a closed cabin with loud pops according to a source telling dailymail

Baldwin was seen on his knees crying and on the phone talking to someone after the shooting and was devastated on what had transpired

After the shooting, the armourer took possession of the gun and a spent casing which were turned over to police along with other prop guns and ammo on set as Baldwin changed out of his western clothes and was stained with blood which was also turned over

A prop master tells dailymail if the person in charge had properly checked the gun first before handing it to baldwin, none of this would have happened

The film is set in the 1880s in the old west and has now halted production indefinitely which also starred Supernatural's Jensen Ackles

Legal experts say naming Alec Baldwin is a virtual certainy but charges are more likely to be centered on whoever loaded the gun"

source articles:

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10121545/Production-crew-walked-Alec-Baldwin-movie-set-hours-tragic-shooting.html

ACTORS ON SCENE:

https://i.imgur.com/moQG4FQ.jpg
https://i.imgur.com/oWRWGOc.jpg
https://i.imgur.com/y8m3pS4.jpg


i'm very very tired of playing a guessing game

of knowing that WHAT is presented is as likely to be a complete fabrication as to have very little to actually do with truth or reality

it is so bad that someone asked my opinion in respect to a topic he had heard on the news, that my response was:

"well, what did the news say?"

and when he told me, i responded:

"ok, if they said THAT, then we can pretty much rule it out, at least we know, THAT is NOT it"

:facepalm:

the lies have now COST loss of freedom, loss of finances and loss of life

of people who innocently trusted and believed the lies they were told

at this point? NOT ONE of us will be spared being DIRECTLY impacted by the time this is done

if THIS does not call for the most SEVERE penalties to bring this to an end? then i honestly do not know what will

ENDLESS propaganda (outright DECEPTION ~ organized conspiracy TO promulgate lies) IS the major CONTINUOUS weapon that is being utilized presently TO enslave humanity

and they have NUMEROUS tentacles:


crisis actors

paid saboteurs

MSM reporters intentionally presenting lies AS facts

ALL of Soro's people basically paid to destroy this country

alphabet agency agents infiltrators

ALL false flag participators


until we stop this? we will never be able to trust what we are told, what is presented to us, what is reported

THESE ARE THE REAL "Domestic Terrorists"

and they are indeed "terrorizing" the people ~ ALL people in fact

committing FRAUD but with far reaching consequences

that are altering (destroying) the very fabric of society

Eradicating our Freedom, Destroying our country and way of life

and there is NO way it should be legal

tolerated or allowed to continue

just isn't

and we haven't much time either ...

[Satori]

https://i.imgur.com/SJPTXTP.jpg


This is the 24 year old BLONDE responsible for
PROP GUNS on Alec Baldwin Movie

Dailymail has revealed that 24 y/o Hanna Gutierrez was the armourer responsible for the guns on set after she was brought in when the local union walked off set and she was there to replace the original prop master.

She was the one who laid out 3 prop guns on a cart out on filming location and then assistant director, Dave Halls grabbed the gun from the cart and brought it to Baldwin unaware it had live rounds.

Halls then shouted "Cold Gun" before handing it to Baldwin using the phrase to signal the cast and crew the gun was safe to fire on the scene and seconds later, Baldwin pulled the trigger that caused the fatal accident..


https://i.imgur.com/jwCSwU7.jpg

Hanna is the daughter of legendary armourer and firearms consultant Thell Reed who worked from a young age and she did not respond to dailymail for comment

The gun that was used was a Colt Pistol that was handed to Baldwin on the set of Rust and was taking part in a MOCK GUNFIGHT inside the building of the Bonzana Ranch

Jensen Ackles, Swen Temmel and Travis Hammer were also on scene as the pistol was one of several weapons on set at the time


The crew on Alec Baldwin's movie set were already concerned about gun safety before he accidentally killed cinemtographer Halyna Hutchins and injured the director, Joel Souza when the prop master in charge of the firearm that killed her had just JOINED the crew after the union walked out during the IATSE dispute!!


https://i.imgur.com/U4rA1aP.jpg


A search warrant said the assistant director handed Baldwin a gun loaded with live rounds and indicated it was "safe" to use in the moments before the fatal shooting

The warrant said a single bullet struck her chest and then the director on his shoulder as he was standing behind her suggesting it travelled all the way through her body....

Unionized workers walked off the set hours before the fatal shooting after they plained about shoddy conditions and another safety incient days earlier involving 2 misfires of a prop weapon

Yet, the unnamed prop master who oversaw the gun used in the fatal shooting was a nonunion worker who was just "brought in on the fly" to replace the workers who walked off set

Unionized employees complained they stayed overnight in Albuquerque, an hour's drive from the set and not Santa Fe because they wouldn't pay their hotels

When they showed up on set, they found out they were placed by LOCALS as it begs the question who those locals were and what training did they have before handing Baldwin the weapon

The gun also had 2 misfires in a closed cabin with loud pops according to a source telling dailymail

Baldwin was seen on his knees crying and on the phone talking to someone after the shooting and was devastated on what had transpired

After the shooting, the armourer took possession of the gun and a spent casing which were turned over to police along with other prop guns and ammo on set as Baldwin changed out of his western clothes and was stained with blood which was also turned over

A prop master tells dailymail if the person in charge had properly checked the gun first before handing it to baldwin, none of this would have happened

The film is set in the 1880s in the old west and has now halted production indefinitely which also starred Supernatural's Jensen Ackles

Legal experts say naming Alec Baldwin is a virtual certainy but charges are more likely to be centered on whoever loaded the gun"

source articles:

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10121545/Production-crew-walked-Alec-Baldwin-movie-set-hours-tragic-shooting.html

ACTORS ON SCENE:

https://i.imgur.com/moQG4FQ.jpg
https://i.imgur.com/oWRWGOc.jpg
https://i.imgur.com/y8m3pS4.jpg


i'm very very tired of playing a guessing game

of knowing that WHAT is presented is as likely to be a complete fabrication as to have very little to actually do with truth or reality

it is so bad that someone asked my opinion in respect to a topic he had heard on the news, that my response was:

"well, what did the news say?"

and when he told me, i responded:

"ok, if they said THAT, then we can pretty much rule it out, at least we know, THAT is NOT it"

:facepalm:

the lies have now COST loss of freedom, loss of finances and loss of life

of people who innocently trusted and believed the lies they were told

at this point? NOT ONE of us will be spared being DIRECTLY impacted by the time this is done

if THIS does not call for the most SEVERE penalties to bring this to an end? then i honestly do not know what will

ENDLESS propaganda (outright DECEPTION ~ organized conspiracy TO promulgate lies) IS the major CONTINUOUS weapon that is being utilized presently TO enslave humanity

and they have NUMEROUS tentacles:


crisis actors

paid saboteurs

MSM reporters intentionally presenting lies AS facts

ALL of Soro's people basically paid to destroy this country

alphabet agency agents infiltrators

ALL false flag participators


until we stop this? we will never be able to trust what we are told, what is presented to us, what is reported

THESE ARE THE REAL "Domestic Terrorists"

and they are indeed "terrorizing" the people ~ ALL people in fact

committing FRAUD but with far reaching consequences

that are altering (destroying) the very fabric of society

Eradicating our Freedom, Destroying our country and way of life

and there is NO way it should be legal

tolerated or allowed to continue

just isn't

and we haven't much time either ...

I live in New Mexico. According to at least one local news source, it is reported from law enforcement sources that Baldwin put a live round into the pistol.

I do not know what happened. None of us do. But there is a lot of finger pointing and cover your ass stuff going on now, as is to be expected.

I will say that the pistol was not a “prop gun”. A prop gun, by definition, cannot fire a live round.

Further, at a minimum, Baldwin acted with reckless or callous disregard when he pointed a “prop gun” at people at close range and then pulled the trigger. He violated every rule of gun safety protocol, on or off a movie set.

[iota]

https://i.imgur.com/SJPTXTP.jpg


This is the 24 year old BLONDE responsible for
PROP GUNS on Alec Baldwin Movie

Dailymail has revealed that 24 y/o Hanna Gutierrez was the armourer responsible for the guns on set after she was brought in when the local union walked off set and she was there to replace the original prop master.

She was the one who laid out 3 prop guns on a cart out on filming location and then assistant director, Dave Halls grabbed the gun from the cart and brought it to Baldwin unaware it had live rounds.

Halls then shouted "Cold Gun" before handing it to Baldwin using the phrase to signal the cast and crew the gun was safe to fire on the scene and seconds later, Baldwin pulled the trigger that caused the fatal accident..


https://i.imgur.com/jwCSwU7.jpg

Hanna is the daughter of legendary armourer and firearms consultant Thell Reed who worked from a young age and she did not respond to dailymail for comment

The gun that was used was a Colt Pistol that was handed to Baldwin on the set of Rust and was taking part in a MOCK GUNFIGHT inside the building of the Bonzana Ranch

Jensen Ackles, Swen Temmel and Travis Hammer were also on scene as the pistol was one of several weapons on set at the time


The crew on Alec Baldwin's movie set were already concerned about gun safety before he accidentally killed cinemtographer Halyna Hutchins and injured the director, Joel Souza when the prop master in charge of the firearm that killed her had just JOINED the crew after the union walked out during the IATSE dispute!!


https://i.imgur.com/U4rA1aP.jpg


A search warrant said the assistant director handed Baldwin a gun loaded with live rounds and indicated it was "safe" to use in the moments before the fatal shooting

The warrant said a single bullet struck her chest and then the director on his shoulder as he was standing behind her suggesting it travelled all the way through her body....

Unionized workers walked off the set hours before the fatal shooting after they plained about shoddy conditions and another safety incient days earlier involving 2 misfires of a prop weapon

Yet, the unnamed prop master who oversaw the gun used in the fatal shooting was a nonunion worker who was just "brought in on the fly" to replace the workers who walked off set

Unionized employees complained they stayed overnight in Albuquerque, an hour's drive from the set and not Santa Fe because they wouldn't pay their hotels

When they showed up on set, they found out they were placed by LOCALS as it begs the question who those locals were and what training did they have before handing Baldwin the weapon

The gun also had 2 misfires in a closed cabin with loud pops according to a source telling dailymail

Baldwin was seen on his knees crying and on the phone talking to someone after the shooting and was devastated on what had transpired

After the shooting, the armourer took possession of the gun and a spent casing which were turned over to police along with other prop guns and ammo on set as Baldwin changed out of his western clothes and was stained with blood which was also turned over

A prop master tells dailymail if the person in charge had properly checked the gun first before handing it to baldwin, none of this would have happened

The film is set in the 1880s in the old west and has now halted production indefinitely which also starred Supernatural's Jensen Ackles

Legal experts say naming Alec Baldwin is a virtual certainy but charges are more likely to be centered on whoever loaded the gun"

source articles:

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10121545/Production-crew-walked-Alec-Baldwin-movie-set-hours-tragic-shooting.html

ACTORS ON SCENE:

https://i.imgur.com/moQG4FQ.jpg
https://i.imgur.com/oWRWGOc.jpg
https://i.imgur.com/y8m3pS4.jpg


i'm very very tired of playing a guessing game

of knowing that WHAT is presented is as likely to be a complete fabrication as to have very little to actually do with truth or reality

it is so bad that someone asked my opinion in respect to a topic he had heard on the news, that my response was:

"well, what did the news say?"

and when he told me, i responded:

"ok, if they said THAT, then we can pretty much rule it out, at least we know, THAT is NOT it"

:facepalm:

the lies have now COST loss of freedom, loss of finances and loss of life

of people who innocently trusted and believed the lies they were told

at this point? NOT ONE of us will be spared being DIRECTLY impacted by the time this is done

if THIS does not call for the most SEVERE penalties to bring this to an end? then i honestly do not know what will

ENDLESS propaganda (outright DECEPTION ~ organized conspiracy TO promulgate lies) IS the major CONTINUOUS weapon that is being utilized presently TO enslave humanity

and they have NUMEROUS tentacles:


crisis actors

paid saboteurs

MSM reporters intentionally presenting lies AS facts

ALL of Soro's people basically paid to destroy this country

alphabet agency agents infiltrators

ALL false flag participators


until we stop this? we will never be able to trust what we are told, what is presented to us, what is reported

THESE ARE THE REAL "Domestic Terrorists"

and they are indeed "terrorizing" the people ~ ALL people in fact

committing FRAUD but with far reaching consequences

that are altering (destroying) the very fabric of society

Eradicating our Freedom, Destroying our country and way of life

and there is NO way it should be legal

tolerated or allowed to continue

just isn't

and we haven't much time either ...

I live in New Mexico. According to at least one local news source, it is reported from law enforcement sources that Baldwin put a live round into the pistol.

I do not know what happened. None of us do. But there is a lot of finger pointing and cover your ass stuff going on now, as is to be expected.

I will say that the pistol was not a “prop gun”. A prop gun, by definition, cannot fire a live round.

Further, at a minimum, Baldwin acted with reckless or callous disregard when he pointed a “prop gun” at people at close range and then pulled the trigger. He violated every rule of gun safety protocol, on or off a movie set.

REALLY? wow!!

so has the arrogance reached such an all time high as to believe he will get away with murder?

he doesn't seem even the teeniest bit concerned

as SM posted


Yesterday Baldwin tweeted a single curious word: "What?" - in response to nothing apparent. His first tweet for months.



even if completely accidental? being devastated at causing the loss of life is the very LEAST appropriate emotion!

i feel like i've dropped into a zombie land

where people are not even real

and have no emotions!

makes me very sad!

:(

[palehorse]

welcome to hollyweird. all these people are freak as hell, you all know that, why so surprised? look into what they do with kids. I am out, just want to post that I am not surprised at all for what happened (it is not the first time), of course a life loss is always bad.

Boycott hollyweird.

[iota]

welcome to hollyweird. all these people are freak as hell, you all know that, why so surprised? look into what they do with kids. I am out, just want to post that I am not surprised at all for what happened (it is not the first time), of course a life loss is always bad.

Boycott hollyweird.

yes Boycott

take action

any action

but may the day NEVER come where this feels normal to me

please let that day never come

[Bubu]

https://scontent.fceb1-2.fna.fbcdn.net/v/t39.30808-6/245945288_4463701800374669_6103930965201367866_n.jpg?_nc_cat=100&ccb=1-5&_nc_sid=8bfeb9&_nc_eui2=AeEbKBmJJGMhnGQkjR7CB_chHSe9X36rb78dJ71ffqtvv4-aJSg7_wyYXI6MiF5J8M_jF_q7miH88yrSy1uPtlsZ&_nc_ohc=FOEC6VrH9GwAX8KYnet&_nc_ht=scontent.fceb1-2.fna&oh=bb058162225a67962226d5a0326c9fcc&oe=617A54E9

[mizo]

Dukes of Hazard actor take on the killing -

https://twitter.com/newsmax/status/1451878705047998477?s=20

[Tyy1907]

Report: Alec Baldwin Fired Prop Gun That Kills 1 on Set of 'Rust'




https://www.newsmax.com/CMSPages/GetFile.aspx?guid=f848157b-9821-4a42-9deb-abafc1821840&SiteName=Newsmax&maxsidesize=600


NEWSMAX reports:

"One person died, and a second person was injured in an accidental shooting Thursday on the set of "Rust," a feature starring Alec Baldwin that was filming in New Mexico.

Fox News reported Baldwin fired the shot that killed his director of photography Halyna Hutchins, 42, and hit director Joel Souza, 42.

A 42-year-old woman died from the incident, which involved a prop firearm, the Santa Fe County Sheriff's Office said in a statement. A 42-year-old man was receiving emergency care.

"The Santa Fe County sheriff's office confirms that two individuals were shot during filming of a scene on the set of the movie western 'Rust,'" the office said in a statement. "According to investigators it appears that the scene being filmed involved the use of a prop firearm when it was discharged. Detectives are investigating how and what type of projectile was discharged."

The incident was reported at 1:50 p.m. M.T. at the Bonanza Creek Ranch, a popular filming location.

The woman was transported by helicopter to University of New Mexico Hospital in Albuquerque, where she died, the office stated. The man was taken by ambulance to Christus St. Vincent Regional Medical Center in Santa Fe.

The Sheriff's office did not identify the woman, saying that next of kin had not been notified.

Joel Souza is writing and directing the Western, which also stars Frances Fisher, Jensen Ackles, Brady Noon and Travis Fimmel. Albuquerque station KOB4's news helicopter photographed the incident, showing an old church set blocked off, and reported that set security confirmed it is on lockdown.

Baldwin is a co-producer on the film and plays infamous outlaw Rust, whose 13-year-old grandson is convicted of an accidental murder. Ackles plays a U.S. Marshal and Fimmel plays a bounty hunter who are on the pair's tail as Rust tries to break his grandson out of prison. An unexpected bond forms between the outlaw and his estranged grandson as they go on the run."

read full article here:
https://www.newsmax.com/us/alec-baldwin-prop-gun-rust/2021/10/21/id/1041535/

Notice the picture they use of Alec Baldwin, looking all shifty. Sultans of spin at work.

[pueblo]

Relevant post copied from here https://projectavalon.net/forum4/editpost.php?p=1458992&do=editpost


This is curious. . The woman who was shot and killed by Alec Balwin, is Halyna Hutchins, 42 years old.


"Ms Hutchins was from Ukraine and grew up on a Soviet military base in the Arctic Circle, according to her personal website. She studied journalism in Kyiv, and film in Los Angeles, and was named a "rising star" by the American Cinematographer magazine in 2019."
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-59005500

What is suspicious is that Halyna was wife of legal firm Latham and Watkins lawyer Matthew Hutchins.
Hutchins just happens to be an attorney for DC powerhouse law firm Latham & Watkins - a law firm that represented the Clintons. Latham & Watkins are representing Sussmann. Coincidence?



Lawyer whose firm represented Clinton campaign indicted by special counsel investigating Russia probe

16 September 2021, 23:03
• 7 min read

A lawyer whose firm represented Hillary Clinton's campaign during the 2016 presidential election was indicted Thursday by special counsel John Durham on a single charge of making a false statement to the FBI.

Michael Sussmann, an attorney for the Perkins Coie law firm who previously represented the Democratic National Committee following the hacking of its servers by Russia during the 2016 campaign, is accused of lying "about the capacity in which he was providing allegations to the FBI" when he met with a top lawyer from the bureau in September 2016 and provided him information about potential ties between a Russian bank and computer servers in the Trump Organization.

"Specifically, SUSSMANN state falsely that he was not doing his work on the aforementioned allegations "for any client," which led the FBI General Counsel (James A. Baker) to understand that SUSSMANN was acting as a good citizen merely passing along information, not as a paid advocate or political operative," prosecutors write in the indictment.

They allege instead that Sussmamn intentionally misled the FBI general counsel because he was acting at the time on behalf of an unnamed tech executive, an "U.S. internet company" and Hillary Clinton's Presidential Campaign.

https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/lawyer-firm-represented-clinton-campaign-indicted-special-counsel/story?id=80065406

[Gracy]

Dukes of Hazard actor take on the killing -

https://twitter.com/newsmax/status/1451878705047998477?s=20

I thoroughly agree with everything John Schneider talks about here, 100%. As a person who gone through both skydiving, and hand gun certification courses, safety safety safety has been engrained into my psyche, and there's something rotten here!

So the first thing thought that came to me upon hearing the tragic news, was obviously "how the bleep does that happen!!??"

Two things engrained in a conceal carry course, is 1) never point a gun at someone unless you're planning on shooting them, and 2) never hand your gun to someone else without first clearing the chambers, and demonstrating to that person the gun is now rendered empty and harmless. If it's a semi automatic, same thing just different: You drop the cartridge, and rack the slide to demonstrate that the gun is indeed rendered harmless.

There are no if's and's or but's to these two rules. I'll bet Bill can name a couple of very similar basics from mountain climbing. Whatever the field in question, there are both certain things that you always do, and certain things that you never do.

Without even knowing the protocals of firearm safety on a movie set, alarm bells went off seeing that Alec Baldwin was handed a "cold gun", and that was that. WHAT!!! Excuse me, that's the extent of their safety protocol? Something sounds verrrrrrrrrrry, not right there... even I as a layman, with just very basic handgun instruction, know as described above you never just hand someone a gun, and basically give a "trust me". No, there is simply no trust of anything any kind in a situation like that, and hell if I know how a seasoned actor like Alec Baldwin wouldn't at least know that as well!

So I found a veteran Hollywood firearms expert, and this article by him is very informative, if you want to know (as I did!) what safety protocols on a movie set are really supposed to look like, I highly recommend the read.
https://ascmag.com/blog/filmmakers-forum/filming-with-firearms

Here are a couple of snippets that stood out to me more than others:


When there are firearms on set, you should be able to glance around and find an experienced firearms safety expert standing near the camera to give guidance to the cast and crew. We also sometimes stand directly in the line of fire, to provide a safe eye line for the actors. We stand in front of our work, and I would never ask an actor or crewmember to stand anywhere I am not willing to stand myself.

There is a saying that amateurs practice until they get it right; professionals practice until they can’t get it wrong. Handling the firearms on a film set should be as important to the cast and crew as the packing of a parachute is to a skydiver. After all, skydivers don’t get their parachutes packed by the amateur who finally got it right after 10 tries; they get them packed by the professional who has never gotten it wrong in 30 years.

It’s like hiring a cinematographer. Productions not willing to pay for a professional will be shocked at the cost of employing an amateur.


“I never forget that if an actor makes a mistake, they get another take, but if a weapons handler makes a mistake, it will make headlines in the morning.”

And this one is key:

Collaborating With Talent
The best part of a career in film is the opportunity to work with so many amazingly talented actors and cinematographers. One of the highlights was teaming with cinematographer James Glennon, ASC and actor Robin Williams on the 2005 film The Big White. During shooting, I was fortunate to become friends with both — and I quickly found out that beneath the humor, Robin Williams never missed a detail.

Many of our scenes involved a revolver. Every day I would show him the empty firearm, load six dummy cartridges into the chambers so it looked fully loaded to camera, and demonstrate that it was completely safe by pointing it in a safe direction and pulling the trigger eight times.

Over the course of two months, he silently observed that I always pulled the trigger exactly eight clicks — two more than necessary for the revolver’s six chambers. Then, on our final day, as I was preparing for our last scene together, Robin asked me why I always pulled the trigger eight times. I told him my personal reason: “The first six are for you, the seventh one is for me, and the eighth one is for Brandon Lee.” The very talented James Glennon, also a skilled person with a firearm, nodded his head in silent agreement.

So, going back to what John Schneider told Newsmax: He didn't speak of the Hollywood union disputes, but it seems the firearms "expert" brought on set was scab labor.

Strike One!

She just told Alec "cold gun".

Strike Two!

Alec didn't think twice about that, and fired the gun unquestioningly.

Strike Three!

Negligence is certainly in play here, criminal negligence if you ask me. When someone dies because of negligence that's some serious s**t.

I purposely left out any woo from this story, as Joe Friday would say on Dragnet, just the facts ma'am. :)

But speaking of woo, I did want to end with kind of a nagging question from the back of my mind: If the actor who pulled the trigger was Clint Eastwood, rather than Alec Baldwin, would it make a difference in how you see this?

[Pam]

Dukes of Hazard actor take on the killing -

https://twitter.com/newsmax/status/1451878705047998477?s=20

I thoroughly agree with everything John Schneider talks about here, 100%. As a person who gone through both skydiving, and hand gun certification courses, safety safety safety has been engrained into my psyche, and there's something rotten here!

So the first thing thought that came to me upon hearing the tragic news, was obviously "how the bleep does that happen!!??"

Two things engrained in a conceal carry course, is 1) never point a gun at someone unless you're planning on shooting them, and 2) never hand your gun to someone else without first clearing the chambers, and demonstrating to that person the gun is now rendered empty and harmless. If it's a semi automatic, same thing just different: You drop the cartridge, and rack the slide to demonstrate that the gun is indeed rendered harmless.

There are no if's and's or but's to these two rules. I'll bet Bill can name a couple of very similar basics from mountain climbing. Whatever the field in question, there are both certain things that you always do, and certain things that you never do.

Without even knowing the protocals of firearm safety on a movie set, alarm bells went off seeing that Alec Baldwin was handed a "cold gun", and that was that. WHAT!!! Excuse me, that's the extent of their safety protocol? Something sounds verrrrrrrrrrry, not right there... even I as a layman, with just very basic handgun instruction, know as described above you never just hand someone a gun, and basically give a "trust me". No, there is simply no trust of anything any kind in a situation like that, and hell if I know how a seasoned actor like Alec Baldwin wouldn't at least know that as well!

So I found a veteran Hollywood firearms expert, and this article by him is very informative, if you want to know (as I did!) what safety protocols on a movie set are really supposed to look like, I highly recommend the read.
https://ascmag.com/blog/filmmakers-forum/filming-with-firearms

Here are a couple of snippets that stood out to me more than others:


When there are firearms on set, you should be able to glance around and find an experienced firearms safety expert standing near the camera to give guidance to the cast and crew. We also sometimes stand directly in the line of fire, to provide a safe eye line for the actors. We stand in front of our work, and I would never ask an actor or crewmember to stand anywhere I am not willing to stand myself.

There is a saying that amateurs practice until they get it right; professionals practice until they can’t get it wrong. Handling the firearms on a film set should be as important to the cast and crew as the packing of a parachute is to a skydiver. After all, skydivers don’t get their parachutes packed by the amateur who finally got it right after 10 tries; they get them packed by the professional who has never gotten it wrong in 30 years.

It’s like hiring a cinematographer. Productions not willing to pay for a professional will be shocked at the cost of employing an amateur.


“I never forget that if an actor makes a mistake, they get another take, but if a weapons handler makes a mistake, it will make headlines in the morning.”

And this one is key:

Collaborating With Talent
The best part of a career in film is the opportunity to work with so many amazingly talented actors and cinematographers. One of the highlights was teaming with cinematographer James Glennon, ASC and actor Robin Williams on the 2005 film The Big White. During shooting, I was fortunate to become friends with both — and I quickly found out that beneath the humor, Robin Williams never missed a detail.

Many of our scenes involved a revolver. Every day I would show him the empty firearm, load six dummy cartridges into the chambers so it looked fully loaded to camera, and demonstrate that it was completely safe by pointing it in a safe direction and pulling the trigger eight times.

Over the course of two months, he silently observed that I always pulled the trigger exactly eight clicks — two more than necessary for the revolver’s six chambers. Then, on our final day, as I was preparing for our last scene together, Robin asked me why I always pulled the trigger eight times. I told him my personal reason: “The first six are for you, the seventh one is for me, and the eighth one is for Brandon Lee.” The very talented James Glennon, also a skilled person with a firearm, nodded his head in silent agreement.

So, going back to what John Schneider told Newsmax: He didn't speak of the Hollywood union disputes, but it seems the firearms "expert" brought on set was scab labor.

Strike One!

She just told Alec "cold gun".

Strike Two!


Alec didn't think twice about that, and fired the gun unquestioningly.

Strike Three!

Negligence is certainly in play here, criminal negligence if you ask me. When someone dies because of negligence that's some serious s**t.

I purposely left out any woo from this story, as Joe Friday would say on Dragnet, just the facts ma'am. :)

But speaking of woo, I did want to end with kind of a nagging question from the back of my mind: If the actor who pulled the trigger was Clint Eastwood, rather than Alec Baldwin, would it make a difference in how you see this?


Logically, Isn't the actor responsible for double checking the gun? If as a nurse someone hands me a medication to give to someone, I wouldn't just blindly accept it. It is my responsibility to verify that it is the correct drug, dosage and route of administration. It wouldn't be the person that handed me the wrong drug that would be responsible or the doctor that prescribed it, it would be me, held accountable for the error if it was wrong because I didn't do my due diligence and verify first.

[Gracy]

Logically, Isn't the actor responsible for double checking the gun?

Absolutely Pam, that's why I pegged him with Strike Three




So, going back to what John Schneider told Newsmax: He didn't speak of the Hollywood union disputes, but it seems the firearms "expert" brought on set was scab labor.

Strike One!

She just told Alec "cold gun".

Strike Two!

Alec didn't think twice about that, and fired the gun unquestioningly.

Strike Three!

There's plenty of fault to go around here. But ultimately if someone (that means anyone and I don't care who!) hands me a gun assuring me it just has blanks, I'm still compelled to be double damn sure that indeed is the case.

I certainly wouldn't hang the whole wrap on him though, after all, in the end he is just an actor. A very irresponsible and negligent actor, but still just an actor.

Were I investigating possible criminal negligence charges, I would look at the firearms "expert" first, and whoever's responsible for hiring that scab labor second.

But still, no matter what happens, whenever I see Alec from now on I'll be thinking "you killed someone, and you have easily prevented that from happening by using just the tiniest bit of common sense. Shame on you!"

[Pam]

Logically, Isn't the actor responsible for double checking the gun?

Absolutely Pam, that's why I pegged him with Strike Three




So, going back to what John Schneider told Newsmax: He didn't speak of the Hollywood union disputes, but it seems the firearms "expert" brought on set was scab labor.

Strike One!

She just told Alec "cold gun".

Strike Two!

Alec didn't think twice about that, and fired the gun unquestioningly.

Strike Three!

There's plenty of fault to go around here. But ultimately if someone (that means anyone and I don't care who!) hands me a gun assuring me it just has blanks, I'm still compelled to be double damn sure that indeed is the case.

I certainly wouldn't hang the whole wrap on him though, after all, in the end he is just an actor. A very irresponsible and negligent actor, but still just an actor.

Were I investigating possible criminal negligence charges, I would look at the firearms "expert" first, and whoever's responsible for hiring that scab labor second.

But still, no matter what happens, whenever I see Alec from now on I'll be thinking "you killed someone, and you have easily prevented that from happening by using just the tiniest bit of common sense. Shame on you!"

I'm pretty sure the corrupt system will find a way out of holding him accountable. He plays his part in the system very nicely. They may go after the young woman. She would probably be the easiest scapegoat. Of course, there could be a civil suit filed against him by the families if the legal system wishes to look the other way. This is California , after all. At the end of the day , I agree, all the blame doesn't fall on him alone. It was just sloppiness throughout the whole affair.

How actual bullet(s )could be placed in the gun is a mystery though. Maybe someone knew how sloppy the whole thing was. It would be interesting to know who it was that was supposed to be shot at in the script.

[Mark (Star Mariner)]

https://scontent.fceb1-2.fna.fbcdn.net/v/t39.30808-6/245945288_4463701800374669_6103930965201367866_n.jpg?_nc_cat=100&ccb=1-5&_nc_sid=8bfeb9&_nc_eui2=AeEbKBmJJGMhnGQkjR7CB_chHSe9X36rb78dJ71ffqtvv4-aJSg7_wyYXI6MiF5J8M_jF_q7miH88yrSy1uPtlsZ&_nc_ohc=FOEC6VrH9GwAX8KYnet&_nc_ht=scontent.fceb1-2.fna&oh=bb058162225a67962226d5a0326c9fcc&oe=617A54E9

That is a facebook link that shows an image of a tweet by Hutchins days before her death:

47744

Holy smokes, Batman. Problem is, nothing I've found (yet) verifies this as a genuine tweet, because -

Halyna Hutchins' twitter account has been completely scrubbed!

Nothing remains, not a single tweet: https://twitter.com/HalynaHutchins

That is odd. I don't recall dead celebs or any hot-topic dead persons having their social media wiped right after their death.

Too early to say if there's anything in this. That image could easily be shopped, but it's suspicious.

Finding several mentions of a potentially new viral meme;

"Alec Baldwin didn't kill himself."

[muxfolder]

Next time this asshole goes on a leftist rant that guns should be banned, we can remind him how many people the others he's trying to point out have killed. Yep, that'd probably be zero.

[wegge]

https://scontent.fceb1-2.fna.fbcdn.net/v/t39.30808-6/245945288_4463701800374669_6103930965201367866_n.jpg?_nc_cat=100&ccb=1-5&_nc_sid=8bfeb9&_nc_eui2=AeEbKBmJJGMhnGQkjR7CB_chHSe9X36rb78dJ71ffqtvv4-aJSg7_wyYXI6MiF5J8M_jF_q7miH88yrSy1uPtlsZ&_nc_ohc=FOEC6VrH9GwAX8KYnet&_nc_ht=scontent.fceb1-2.fna&oh=bb058162225a67962226d5a0326c9fcc&oe=617A54E9

That is a facebook link that shows an image of a tweet by Hutchins days before her death:

47744

Holy smokes, Batman. Problem is, nothing I've found (yet) verifies this as a genuine tweet, because -

Halyna Hutchins' twitter account has been completely scrubbed!

Nothing remains, not a single tweet: https://twitter.com/HalynaHutchins

That is odd. I don't recall dead celebs or any hot-topic dead persons having their social media wiped right after their death.

Too early to say if there's anything in this. That image could easily be shopped, but it's suspicious.

Finding several mentions of a potentially new viral meme;

"Alec Baldwin didn't kill himself."


These Tweets also popped up after Kobe Bryant’s death, it seems to be a running gag.

[Gracy]

Next time this asshole goes on a leftist rant that guns should be banned, we can remind him how many people the others he's trying to point out have killed. Yep, that'd probably be zero.

That's a good point! Might be time for him to lay off of the leftist anti gun crap eh?

But that's also why I question if this would have happened with ultra conservative Clint Eastwood instead, would we be giving him more slack?

I mean obviously Clint is way too smart and competent to do something so utterly stupid and irresponsible, but it's still a good mental exercise.

:nod:

[Anna70]

So, going back to what John Schneider told Newsmax: He didn't speak of the Hollywood union disputes, but it seems the firearms "expert" brought on set was scab labor.

Strike One!

She just told Alec "cold gun".

Strike Two!

Alec didn't think twice about that, and fired the gun unquestioningly.

Strike Three!

Negligence is certainly in play here, criminal negligence if you ask me. When someone dies because of negligence that's some serious s**t.

I purposely left out any woo from this story, as Joe Friday would say on Dragnet, just the facts ma'am. :)

But speaking of woo, I did want to end with kind of a nagging question from the back of my mind: If the actor who pulled the trigger was Clint Eastwood, rather than Alec Baldwin, would it make a difference in how you see this?

Thank you so much for sharing your knowledge on this, Gracy, and confirmation of what is said in the John Schneider video. I believe the gun was handed to Baldwin by assistant director Dave Halls, not the armorer.

Interesting how the female presenter is suddenly keen to end the conversation when John Schneider insists this is not an accident. Did you notice her body language when he brings this up? But then, perhaps it really was a simple 'running out of time' thing.

Edit: I just saw this again, and noticed the male presenter did mention that they only had one minute left, so it seems my conspiracy nut brain ran away a little too much with itself... :facepalm:

[iota]

Notice the picture they use of Alec Baldwin, looking all shifty. Sultans of spin at work.



Tyy! i'm going to start paying closer attention to you!

you've been "picking up" on things, subtleties even, well beyond the surface!


:sun:

spin and all manner of deception, infiltration and controlled opposition is the most lethal infestation that has been unleashed upon unsuspecting innocent people around the world

none of the mandates for our enslavement could move forward withOUT that CONSTANT and relentless "spin"

i fear history will bear out the damage long after the destruction is complete

like here ... removing ALL the spin ... the TRUTH emerges indisputably


here was my contribution:


(as i posted earlier)


https://i.imgur.com/Wi413NHl.jpg


the ONLY gun i know actually "trained" to shoot on command?

is my neighbor's

and he's not spilling on how he trained it til the patent gets approved

most people i know can't even get one to "sit"

;)

point being, guns don't act on their own volition, now do they?

[Tyy1907]

It's hard to know what 's really going on here, but it's a time honored tactic to smear an "unruly" individual as they have many ways to do so.

[Hym]

My deepest condolences to her family, her son, her husband, her sister, her parents her friends and colleagues. This had better change the abuse that the local, statewide union is well known for perpetuating, and what I see as the deep underlying illness that created the grounds for the loss of the life of this beautiful soul.

For those of us in that local union, those present and the multiples thereof who have left because of the abuse, the blacklisting of responsible members, the nepotism, the extreme pay to play atmosphere that productions have taken full advantage of, we see the real reasons for her death. Don't dismiss why and how this happened in the atmosphere of film production in New Mexico.

Oh, and watch those b.s. apologists repeat every stock lie at every junction where the union and the industry pays lip service, but rarely stands up for, safe and ethical treatment of all participants in every production. From the lowest paid p.a. (non-union production assistant) to the actors themselves we all know why any production, working in the state of New Mexico, felt comfortable enough to hire such an inexperienced person as an on set armorer.

The fact that there is an unconfirmed report that the same weapon was used at the site, even if away from the set or after hours, for live fire target shooting and that there were already two "accidental" misfires of the same weapon just before the tragic shooting were grounds for halting all production, firing the armorer and for the production to bring everyone, before the tragedy, into a very detailed, in-your-face safety meeting....no matter how long it took to go over the necessary step by step, person to person, out loud repetition of the protocol for checking each and every weapon......each chamber, each clip, each magazine visually checked by both parties and verbally noted....safety on, safety off....safety on until live fire, etc.

Never point a weapon, even a prop gun, at anyone, AT ANY TIME. Ingrained safety habits become life saving practices. As liable as productions are you'd think that they'd listen to all of the safety conscious crew members there are out there....yet, greed doesn't operate that way.
And for anyone, especially an armorer to say to anyone, esp. an A.D., that any weapon is "cold"!!!! That never happens in this context, unless it did when an inexperienced armorer, an assistant director/a.d., BOTH did not visually check each cylinder with the next person handling the weapon before handing it over to the actor, and then going thru the same protocol with the actor.

There is a saying by New Mexicans about corruption in the state and it is, "Only in New Mexico....", which by the way Mexicans from Mexico say about New Mexicans and their politics, meaning the same thing. It only pisses off people here because there are so many good, smart and hard working and honest people here that the many examples of corruption STILL need to be faced and dealt with.

The armorer who worked with Robin Williams was asked by Robin why, with a six shooter, he had the actor live pull the trigger eight times when checking the loads while firing into the ground. The answer was that 6 were for the 6 chambers of the pistol, one was for the armorer himself and his responsibility for the safety of all, and one was for the memory of the unnecessary death of Brandon Bruce Lee who died as a result of an unchecked, uncleaned weapon discharging a projectile that killed him or, as noted, the result of the fragments of a .45 round being found in his body.

As the young armorer is a daughter of a highly experienced armorer in film, I don't doubt that nepotism has played a part in someone boasting about the supposed level of professional responsibility being used as a partial basis for their highly questionable employment, by a production, likely a line producer, that is morally bankrupt at least and criminally negligent when all is said and done. But that is the point.....It took a life, and that Living Love, that mother, that wife, that daughter, that friend, that treasured and appreciated work colleague is gone.

As I have very detailed contact with an actor who has fired a wide variety of weapons in film and t.v. work and who has gone thru the necessarily rigorous protocols of one of the most competent armorers in film, I see the hiring of such an inexperienced armorer, the presence of a highly compromised union membership and the lack of responsible production oversight as the saddest outcome of what greed can do to destroy the lives of a dearly loved family member. It took many people to stand idly by and not step up and not complain and not call the hotline to report the danger. The 24 hour IATSE Safety Hotline 844-422-9273 (1-844 IA-AWARE).


It's a very sad and preventable death that is a small opening into the state of New Mexico's film productions. It is a sick work environment where uncaring, greedy productions have increasingly exploited both union and non-union employees to save a buck, while threatening the lives of all on set by hiring inexperienced workers instead of waiting for the competent workers to be available. Some of us say "What union?", and we are being accurate.

I liken the imaginary union as the same fiction as the former safety organization here in the states, OSHA, the Occupational Safety and Health Administration. OSHA IS AN HERB, and no longer a national department of worker safety. Especially now, when it has abandoned the proper use of PPE's by going all political Bi#ch. It should be sued for allowing any business to overrule it's safety recommendations, based on decades of science and millions of hours of worker experiences, on the limited use of masks.


Present and past members, who outnumber the present union membership by 2, 3 or 4 times (? or more), would do well to put up ads in the most circulated newspapers and weeklies in the state, like the Santa Fe New Mexican and the Albuquerque Journal, asking present local 480 members, 600 members, teamsters and others in film why they are going to leave and why they have left in droves.

If you want to know what real journalism IS NOT, watch how much is left out of the t.v. broadcasts when going on about this tragedy. The most prominent "investigative journalist" in the state, who most of us thoroughly appreciate for most of his reporting, has never done a deep dive into the immense corruption in the film union in the state and some of us know exactly why.

I would not bet that even the most independent of journalists in NM have the guts to go for that Pulitzer waiting to be written. It's not as if they are the tiny Rio Grande Sun here in Espanola, which has more balls than all of the other publications combined. This work place story, this invisible movie, this never ending series is the one that thousands of ex-union members, and many current members could write and all a real reporter would have to do is edit it. That would do wonders for healing the deep, deep state of corruption that created the atmosphere for just such a real tragedy to occur, for all of the lost careers, for all of the accidents, for so many of the drug overdoses, for so many of the lost relationships, all the direct result of greed.


Hiring an armorer who should have been fired on the first film she did, for handing a firearm to an 11 year old, was the first deliberate act of malfeasance from the producers on Rust who either didn't investigate her actions there, or did and ignored the danger that such an inexperienced and undisciplined armorer, with a proven unsafe history, presented to the entire crew.

If the scab, non union, "crew" that was hired afterwards was not union trained, even in a union as f'd up as this one, one I am presently a member of, here is a reminder...

No matter who you are or where you are, SPEAKING UP to prevent injury or death is something you SHOULD do. In our union training and in the contracts, even those written by the litigation avoidant productions, we are reminded that every single member of the crew,
whether on their first day or their last day before retirement,
whether on the cleaning crew for the restrooms or the above the line, highest paid employee,
you have the right and the implied duty to speak out when there is a present or upcoming, possible danger to anyone. The union contract provides full protection for anyone speaking out, noting, even yelling out a warning in order to prevent injury or death.

Did the union crew who quit just before the incident leave just because of the low budget habit of cheap productions not paying for adequate housing or hotel rooms, making it a long drive to and from work thus increasing the possibilities of having an accident from falling asleep on the road, or were there other legitimate reasons that were piled on that made them pack up their gear and leave? I'll find out, as I likely have friends who were on the production.

Just about everything that could go wrong did, but at every step in the tragedy the safety protocols we know and adhere to in film production were ignored. Maybe it is because I know how unions should work, like the 891 in Vancouver where people "don't shuffle their feet or carry their hats in their hands like beggars" as prominent union local 480 reps and members in New Mexico do, where there lives a union that is highly responsible for it's members and where it is very hard for corruption to take hold and divert the real reason that unions exist.

I doubt it has been done before but those who know and have worked with me in the union might remember me calling myself out at a safety meeting for following the advice of my foreman to go ahead and shoot a nail gun when i felt it was unsafe. I did not mention him in calling out my mistake. Even so, and despite his insistence, I should NOT have fired that nail gun! I missed him, but I WAS RESPONSIBLE, either way. The lesson I was sharing was to always err on the side of safety, and saying NO is a good thing to do.

Until all crew members know that they all are personally responsible to speak up, all of the wrong doings on their work sites from abuse to death will continue.

There is so much more to the lives of those within and far past union membership that should be addressed. In my view this may be the last chance for that union membership to regain it's authenticity as a union.

[Hym]

'Inexperienced’ Armorer on Baldwin Set Raised Alarm Bells on Prior Film

Filming was briefly halted on the set of 24-year-old armorer Hannah Gutierrez-Reed’s last movie after she allegedly gave a gun to an 11-year-old without checking it properly.

https://www.thedailybeast.com/alec-baldwin-film-rust-hired-inexperienced-armorer-hannah-gutierrez-reed-before-halyna-hutchins-shooting?source=email&via=desktop

[iota]

it's still a good mental exercise.




How so?

what would be the purpose? and intent behind that suggestion?

you suggested it twice, couched in insinuation obviously directing towards a specific end goal in mind

please DISCLOSE ~ WHAT IT IS





why I question



But WHY?

WHY do you pose a question to which the answer is already contained in your post?

WHAT is the intent and purpose behind your insinuation?






I mean obviously Clint is way too smart and competent to do something so utterly stupid and irresponsible



but please allow me to answer


obviously the question was not posed to elicit an answer

but rather to REDIRECT FOCUS in direct alignment with the official social narrative


your post ended with a subtle insinuation

that undermines what was posted before it

providing an effective tactic to REDIRECT the FOCUS

and then just in case it was missed? you presented it twice,

the second time clearly placing at the CENTER of FOCUS



I did want to end with kind of a nagging question from the back of my mind:

If the actor who pulled the trigger was Clint Eastwood, rather than Alec Baldwin, would it make a difference in how you see this?


ANSWER:

of course it would. you KNOW this and KNEW it prior to posing the question. this is why when you would bait me to explain what "you didn't understand" i would ignore you

that is like asking, would it make a difference if:

an expert vs novice were the subjects in question?

similar question would be to ask if it would make a difference if

a CHILD pulled the trigger as opposed to an adult?

or as is the case here and so allow me to state the OBVIOUS:




YES, OF COURSE it would make a difference if

"outed social narrative spokes person" vs non agenda individual pulled trigger



EVERY detail is of import and it would take a most disingenuous agent to suggest that details are inconsequential and factors be ignored

please explain what is your intention and purpose in your insinuation

are you suggesting it prudent to just disregard details? deny their pertinence?

WHY would we do that, EXACTLY?

again, the question was inherently answered in your post by you,

so you utilized the question as a tactic to insert and insinuation with the intent to REDIRECT the focus

it is a common AND established practice of those engaged IN directing the social narrative

most here are well aware of that

:facepalm:


in order to better understand you, in reading anything you post, the following questions are always pertinent:


what is the purpose behind your post?

what are the subtleties and insinuations that are interjected?

and how do they align with the official directed social narrative?


it is like needing a codebreaker just to decipher your posts

:facepalm:

reading your posts without applying these questions?
[/COLOR][/I]

results in complete failure to understand WHAT your post actually communicated and the intent and purpose behind it

ETA:

at least since i shone the spotlight on it, the insults, condescension , sarcasm and derision basically undermining member in your posts occur with less frequency! you also seem to be exercising more restraint in your habitual insensitivity towars members, your unmerciful trolling, introduction of divisiveness, preventing conversations from moving forward ~ relentlessly for well over a year

ALL of that was was and DID have a negative impact, so i'm really glad it is in the process of change.

i keep telling members that WE ARE capable of effecting change .. "your new and improved" 2.0 is certainly a VERY welcome one. yet, no one has thanked me. and they should because there is no way you were going to change on your own as long as you had free reign to get away with it. and everyone was pretending it was ok because you are a mod which was unseemly, unjust as well as an abuse of your authority and violation of the trust placed upon you.

now if we can just address the subtle innuendos. insinuations, your perpetual steering of redirection BACK to alignment with the social narrative, changing of the script (your "opinions") right on schedule with the change of narrative in MSM?

maybe gracy 3.0?

[thepainterdoug]

i dont understand this Armorer job. so your only job is to handle, load the guns and hand them out for the scenes. is it that difficult?

a gun is not complicate. a gun is dangerous , when loaded, but not complicated. its like packing a parachute in my opinion. you check double and triple check and you have plenty of time to do so

[iota]

i dont understand this Armorer job. so your only job is to handle, load the guns and hand them out for the scenes. is it that difficult?

a gun is not complicate. a gun is dangerous , when loaded, but not complicated. its like packing a parachute in my opinion. you check double and triple check and you have plenty of time to do so


others agree .. one comment i read made it quite clear



I don't care if three gunsmiths, two gun store owners, a world champion shooter and Clint Eastwood tell me a gun is empty, it isn't empty until I see for myself that it is empty. Guys like Baldwin are too used to having other people do everything for them. Some things are so important that you have to do them yourself. Checking a gun you are about to handle is one of those important things.

what perplexes me to no end is the proclivity to ABSOLVE one's self of responsibility for everything

someone may put a gun in my hand? the choice to keep it, drop it, examine it or use it?

is then mine

we often behave as though someone else is responsible for the choices we make

which leads to the quality of life we enjoy (or not)

which leads to Freedom and Empowerment

or abdication of personal power, responsibility which leads to inevitable enslavement

people compartmentalize LIFE

attempting to separate what is going on externally from within

when it is, and WILL always be

a CLEAR reflection of each other

[iota]

https://beckernews.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/10/AB2-scaled.jpg


It Wasn’t a ‘Prop Gun’: Alec Baldwin Shot a Firearm

That Was Being Used for Target Practice Off Set

BECKER REPORT:

"The fallout of the Alec Baldwin shooting tragedy has led to further questions about how a “prop gun” could have fired a live round that killed the film’s cinematographer Halyna Hutchins. Furthermore, another question that has gone under the radar is how the Baldwin shooting also led to the wounding of director Joel Souza.

It wasn’t a “prop gun.” It was an actual gun that was being used as a prop. TMZ reported on the development that sources close to the filming of “Rust” indicate that the gun used in the incident was also used off-set for “target practice.”

“The smoking gun that claimed the life of Halyna Hutchins might’ve been more than just an on-set prop — it was also being fired recreationally, even when cameras weren’t rolling,” TMZ reported.

“Multiple sources directly connected to the ‘Rust’ production tell TMZ … the same gun Alec Baldwin accidentally fired — hitting the DP and director — was being used by crews members off set as well, for what we’re told amounted to target practice,” the report added.

According to the BBC, a “prop gun” could mean a range of items, “from non-functioning weapons to cap guns… But it can also mean a real weapon, or one adapted for firing blanks.” However, Hollywood should ban the term from applying to actual firearms.

A disturbing 911 call shed light on how assistant director David Halls had given Baldwin the weapon that ultimately killed Hutchins and wounded Souza. Mamie Mitchell, the script supervisor of the film, made the 911 call for help, the Daily Mail reported.

“We need an ambulance out at Bonanza Creek Ranch right now. We have had two people accidentally shot on a movie set accidentally,” Mitchell said. As she is talking to the 911 operator she instructs someone else to make certain the ambulance has access to the road.

“Bonanza Creek ranch. We have had two people accidentally shot on a movie set by a prop gun,” she said. “We need help immediately. Bonanza Creek ranch. Come on.”

“It sounds like somebody else is calling for ambulances,” the operator said.

“Everybody should be. We need some help,” Mitchell said. “Our director and our camerawoman has been shot.”

“So, was it loaded with a real bullet or what?” the 911 operator asks.

“I don’t, I cannot tell you that. We have two injuries from a movie gunshot,” Mitchell replies.

“While the phone operator is inputting the details, Mitchell can be heard telling someone else: “OK, this f****** AD that yelled at me at lunch asking about revisions, this motherf*****.'”

“Did you see him lean over my desk and yell at me?” Mitchell said. “He’s supposed to check the guns. He’s responsible for what happened.”

The reckless incident, which occurred under the stewardship of the co-producer Baldwin, has caused some to wonder about how the weapon could have had live ammunition when he shot it.

According to the warrant, Halls told Baldwin the weapon was “cold,” even though it was loaded with live ammunition. Halls is a veteran of the film industry and has worked as an assistant director on major productions like Fargo, The Matrix Reloaded, and Reno 911.

“The gun Halls picked up was reportedly one of three laid on a cart by the film’s armorer, Hannah Gutierrez-Reed,” The Sun reported. “It’s not clear at this time how many rounds were fired. Gutierrez-Reed, 24, is the daughter of longtime film industry armorer, Thell Reed.”

Advertisements
Gutierrez-Reed has reportedly deleted her major social media accounts in the aftermath of the deadly shooting.

While the shooting is believed to be an accident, there is an ongoing shooting investigation into how such a deadly incident could occur. According to the publication Variety, which reported the tragic incident on Thursday night, the shooting was chalked up by the production company as a “misfire” of a “prop gun with blanks.”

Baldwin, who was visibly devastated upon learning that the shooting had led to the untimely death of Hutchins, willingly provided a statement to the sheriff’s office.


https://twitter.com/thenewmexican/status/1451366701250093058



"While the production company involved claimed that there was a “misfire of a prop gun with blanks,” the Sheriff’s office indicated that it was “too soon to say what type of round was involved,” Variety reported. The Sheriff’s Office also did not use the word “accident,” the publication noted, leaving that to be determined by investigators.

“We’re treating this as we would any other investigation,” sheriff’s office spokesman Juan Ríos said about the matter.

“The prop was fired at Bonanza Creek Ranch, where filming was underway, the sheriff’s office said in an early evening news release,” the Santa Fe New Mexican reported. “The set was locked down while deputies began their investigation.”

“Attempts to get comment from Baldwin outside the sheriff’s office were unsuccessful,” the publication added.

In a statement to The New York Times, Rust Movie Productions said: “The entire cast and crew has been absolutely devastated by today’s tragedy, and we send our deepest condolences to Halyna’s family and loved ones. We have halted production on the film for an undetermined period of time and are fully cooperating with the Santa Fe Police Department’s investigation. We will be providing counseling services to everyone connected to the film as we work to process this awful event.”

Baldwin, who should again be noted is a co-producer on the film, has mocked Donald Trump and law-abiding gun owners about firearms safety in the past."


https://twitter.com/AlecBaldwln____/status/911425278123048960

“I wonder how it must feel to wrongfully kill someone…” he tweeted.

More posts were unearthed by the Post Millenial.



https://beckernews.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/10/Screen-Shot-2021-10-22-at-8.03.44-AM-1.png



There were even more.


https://beckernews.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/10/Screen-Shot-2021-10-22-at-8.04.04-AM.png

read more here:
https://beckernews.com/it-wasnt-a-prop-gun-alec-baldwin-shot-a-firearm-that-was-being-used-for-target-practice-off-set-42668/

[iota]

https://img-s-msn-com.akamaized.net/tenant/amp/entityid/AAPSBYQ.img?h=491&w=874&m=6&q=60&o=f&l=f&x=461&y=163


Halyna Hutchins Death: Petition To Ban Real Guns On Film Sets
Races Past 23,000 Signatories; California Senator Vows Ammunition Legislation

DEADLINE Reports:
Andreas Wiseman 8 mins ago

"A petition to ban real guns on film sets has raced past 23,000 signatories following the death of DoP Halyna Hutchins.

The change.org petition, launched by filmmaker Bandar Albuliwi, has accumulated 23,600 names after being launched Friday.

The petition states: “We need to make sure that this avoidable tragedy never happens again. There is no excuse for something like this to happen in the 21st century. Real guns are no longer needed on film production sets. This isn’t the early 90’s, when Brandon Lee was killed in the same manner. Change needs to happen before additional talented lives are lost.

“Please sign this petition and demand for Alec Baldwin to use his power and influence in the Hollywood film industry to make change and ban real guns on film sets.” Additionally, the petition calls for better working conditions on independent and studio film sets.

Growing calls

Calls to ban real firearms and ammunition on sets have been growing since Hutchins’ death on indie movie Rust.

On Saturday, Dave Cortese, a Democrat elected to the California Senate, issued a statement saying: “There is an urgent need to address alarming work abuses and safety violations occurring on the set of theatrical productions, including unnecessary high-risk conditions such as the use of live firearms…I intend to introduce legislation that would ban live ammunition on sets in California to prevent this type of senseless violence and loss of life.”

On Friday, ABC’s police drama The Rookie banned real guns on sets.

Meanwhile, Eric Kripke, showrunner for Amazon Prime’s The Boys, tweeted: “no more guns with blanks on any of my sets ever. We’ll use VFX muzzle flashes. Who’s with me?”

Craig Zobel, director of Mare Of Easttown and The Leftovers, noted on Twitter: “There’s no reason to have guns loaded with blanks or anything on set anymore. Should just be fully outlawed. There’s computers now. The gunshots on Mare of Easttown are all digital. You can probably tell, but who cares? It’s an unnecessary risk.”

Hutchins was killed last Thursday during production of western Rust. The DoP was shot accidentally by actor Alec Baldwin. Director Joel Souza was also injured in the incident, but was subsequently discharged from hospital."

source here (https://deadline.com/2021/10/halyna-hutchins-petition-ban-real-guns-legislation-california-1234861635/)

a letter went out to the cast and crew of the movie "Rust" informing the crew that they’ve “made the decision to wrap the set at least until investigations are complete.”

video posted here (https://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?114794-VIDEO-memes-and-popular-culture&p=1459347&viewfull=1#post1459347)

i'm not really clear why they need a petition for this?

any studio CAN and SHOULD have banned real guns for sets just as a matter of course

to bring legislation in?

from my experience? they like to "Stick" things in there

so i guess that's where they're going with this

and we won't know until its passed, because of this tragedy?

not one legislator will want to be known for voting against it

i guess they'll hit payload with this one

[Matthew]

Rumours... wonder if it's true?

Has anyone else heard anything about this? Might be B.S.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FCe_vC9XsAEKHoG?format=jpg&name=small

Sorry if this is B.S.!


***edit update***

https://www.worldgreynews.com/details/175498/halyna-hutchins-next-project-was-documentary-on-hollywood-pedophile-rings

[Sérénité]

https://www.worldgreynews.com/details/175498/halyna-hutchins-next-project-was-documentary-on-hollywood-pedophile-rings

“The director of photography killed by Alec Baldwin was attached to the controversial upcoming documentary about alleged pedophile rings in the entertainment industry”


***update... Snap Matthew :waving::bigsmile:

[ExomatrixTV]

Vigil held for cinematographer Halyna Hutchins, killed on ‘Rust’ set:

6b09R5k3qHY


Accident or Hollywood Sacrifice? Alec Baldwin Kills Halyna Hutchins on set of "Rust":

R4tP9QAQW8g

[happyuk]

Dukes of Hazard actor take on the killing -

https://twitter.com/newsmax/status/1451878705047998477?s=20

I thoroughly agree with everything John Schneider talks about here, 100%. As a person who gone through both skydiving, and hand gun certification courses, safety safety safety has been engrained into my psyche, and there's something rotten here!

So the first thing thought that came to me upon hearing the tragic news, was obviously "how the bleep does that happen!!??"

Two things engrained in a conceal carry course, is 1) never point a gun at someone unless you're planning on shooting them, and 2) never hand your gun to someone else without first clearing the chambers, and demonstrating to that person the gun is now rendered empty and harmless. If it's a semi automatic, same thing just different: You drop the cartridge, and rack the slide to demonstrate that the gun is indeed rendered harmless.

There are no if's and's or but's to these two rules. I'll bet Bill can name a couple of very similar basics from mountain climbing. Whatever the field in question, there are both certain things that you always do, and certain things that you never do.

Without even knowing the protocals of firearm safety on a movie set, alarm bells went off seeing that Alec Baldwin was handed a "cold gun", and that was that. WHAT!!! Excuse me, that's the extent of their safety protocol? Something sounds verrrrrrrrrrry, not right there... even I as a layman, with just very basic handgun instruction, know as described above you never just hand someone a gun, and basically give a "trust me". No, there is simply no trust of anything any kind in a situation like that, and hell if I know how a seasoned actor like Alec Baldwin wouldn't at least know that as well!

So I found a veteran Hollywood firearms expert, and this article by him is very informative, if you want to know (as I did!) what safety protocols on a movie set are really supposed to look like, I highly recommend the read.
https://ascmag.com/blog/filmmakers-forum/filming-with-firearms

Here are a couple of snippets that stood out to me more than others:


When there are firearms on set, you should be able to glance around and find an experienced firearms safety expert standing near the camera to give guidance to the cast and crew. We also sometimes stand directly in the line of fire, to provide a safe eye line for the actors. We stand in front of our work, and I would never ask an actor or crewmember to stand anywhere I am not willing to stand myself.

There is a saying that amateurs practice until they get it right; professionals practice until they can’t get it wrong. Handling the firearms on a film set should be as important to the cast and crew as the packing of a parachute is to a skydiver. After all, skydivers don’t get their parachutes packed by the amateur who finally got it right after 10 tries; they get them packed by the professional who has never gotten it wrong in 30 years.

It’s like hiring a cinematographer. Productions not willing to pay for a professional will be shocked at the cost of employing an amateur.


“I never forget that if an actor makes a mistake, they get another take, but if a weapons handler makes a mistake, it will make headlines in the morning.”

And this one is key:

Collaborating With Talent
The best part of a career in film is the opportunity to work with so many amazingly talented actors and cinematographers. One of the highlights was teaming with cinematographer James Glennon, ASC and actor Robin Williams on the 2005 film The Big White. During shooting, I was fortunate to become friends with both — and I quickly found out that beneath the humor, Robin Williams never missed a detail.

Many of our scenes involved a revolver. Every day I would show him the empty firearm, load six dummy cartridges into the chambers so it looked fully loaded to camera, and demonstrate that it was completely safe by pointing it in a safe direction and pulling the trigger eight times.

Over the course of two months, he silently observed that I always pulled the trigger exactly eight clicks — two more than necessary for the revolver’s six chambers. Then, on our final day, as I was preparing for our last scene together, Robin asked me why I always pulled the trigger eight times. I told him my personal reason: “The first six are for you, the seventh one is for me, and the eighth one is for Brandon Lee.” The very talented James Glennon, also a skilled person with a firearm, nodded his head in silent agreement.

So, going back to what John Schneider told Newsmax: He didn't speak of the Hollywood union disputes, but it seems the firearms "expert" brought on set was scab labor.

Strike One!

She just told Alec "cold gun".

Strike Two!

Alec didn't think twice about that, and fired the gun unquestioningly.

Strike Three!

Negligence is certainly in play here, criminal negligence if you ask me. When someone dies because of negligence that's some serious s**t.

I purposely left out any woo from this story, as Joe Friday would say on Dragnet, just the facts ma'am. :)

But speaking of woo, I did want to end with kind of a nagging question from the back of my mind: If the actor who pulled the trigger was Clint Eastwood, rather than Alec Baldwin, would it make a difference in how you see this?

Awesome post!

But as Clint rightly points out, when it comes to guns, feeling lucky and being lucky are two different things...

V7Nci-GVuHE

[waves]

Something is also too timely, orderly, tied to the hottest dark issues, diversionary, triggering, button pushing..... etc.... and by actors. AND, the list of just as fake, TIMELY and even bigger total lie psyop events is getting very long.

This whole thing makes me notice that the conspiracy crowd is now easy to predict and use. They are now trained and will do exactly as expected when baited and have become their own category of exploitable gullibility. Has the conspiracy crowd provided the proof of death first before running off to the 'make connections' races? It will be telling if a funeral will be up-played or ignored.

Just saying. I suspect everything with any media/social impact these days.

[iota]

Something is also too timely, orderly, tied to the hottest dark issues, diversionary, triggering, button pushing..... etc.... and by actors. AND, the list of just as fake, TIMELY and even bigger total lie psyop events is getting very long.

This whole thing makes me notice that the conspiracy crowd is now easy to predict and use. They are now trained and will do exactly as expected when baited and have become their own category of exploitable gullibility. Has the conspiracy crowd provided the proof of death first before running off to the 'make connections' races? It will be telling if a funeral will be up-played or ignored.

Just saying. I suspect everything with any media/social impact these days.

that is VERY perceptive of you

we ALREADY know that what is presented to us bears little resemblance to reality

we've developed innovative research skills, ask all the right questions and arrive at accurate conclusions the majority of the time!

we're pretty much experts at:


"seeing through the mirage"
spotting what is obvioulsy "fake"
spot crisis actors almost immediately
look for connections between all involved
and checking out the veracity of information presented AS presented now is automatic


that's a bit too close for comfort for them, so they come in do ALL they can to undermine our efforts and confidence:

statements like "oh i don't think that's what's happening"

are designed to stop us in our tracks and deter us

we need to TRUST ourSelves more than an external voice seeking to undermine us

it is really difficult to operate in our personal lives operating from a marked loss of power and then suddenly be empowered on a public level

so we need to recognize what "weapons" are used against us. the intent is to undermine us AND what we KNOW to be true

let's stop being dissuaded or discouraged and recognize statements for that purpose

"oh .. i don't think that's what it is ... " followed by re-direction of focus

if, we have been "trained"? THESE were the methodologies utilized

when we refuse to relinquish our power personally?

it will be reflected publicly[/B]

we can at least apply some RE-TRAINING in order to decipher what is DEFINITELY being directed at us

we can look deeper to intent in ALL communications presented to us and ask:


what is the purpose behind that communication?

what are the subtleties and insinuations that are interjected?

and how do they align with the official directed social narrative?


just as we've learned to apply these filters to what is shown in MSM? the need has arisen to apply them ANYWHERE they KNOW we obtain information

otherwise we run the risk of not just being deceived, but disarmed

we REALLY ARE smarter than they are

it is WHY they can only succeed if they manage to deceive us

:shielddeflect:

[iota]

https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-wWIhRFeHHpU/YXM2C3jjWkI/AAAAAAABYlA/MrauyBJkOz8KHMoZpqtQqb_Rsgak345nQCLcBGAsYHQ/w1200-h630-p-k-no-nu/baldwin%2Bgun.jpg



New narrative protecting Alec Baldwin

quote:

Crew member: Alec Baldwin careful with guns before fatal ‘Rust’ shooting


Well, he wasn't that careful though, was he?

quote:

A camera operator told authorities that Alec Baldwin had been careful with weapons on the set of the film “Rust” before the actor shot and killed a cinematographer with a gun he’d been told was safe to use, court records released Sunday show.

Cameraman Reid Russell told a detective that Baldwin was rehearsing a scene Thursday in which he was set to draw his gun while sitting in a church pew and point it at the camera. Russell said he was unsure whether the weapon was checked before it was handed to Baldwin.


They're doing their best for someone else to take the fall..

quote:

Authorities said Friday that the assistant director, Dave Halls, had handed the weapon to Baldwin and announced “cold gun,” indicating it was safe to use. When asked about how Baldwin treated firearms on the set, Russell said the actor was very careful, citing an instance when Baldwin made sure a child actor was not near him when a gun was being discharged.''

source: FOX 8 (https://www.fox8live.com/2021/10/25/crew-member-alec-baldwin-careful-with-guns-before-fatal-rust-shooting/)



https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FCU7xiBXEAEAQ5E?format=jpg&name=large


here is the article:

"SANTA FE, N.M. (AP) — The assistant director who handed Alec Baldwin the gun that killed a cinematographer last week had been fired from a previous job after a gun went off on a set and wounded a member of the film crew, a producer said Monday.

The disclosure emerged as producers of Baldwin’s movie officially halted filming, and court records showed that investigators seized more than two dozen items from the set on the day after the shooting.

In an email statement to The Associated Press, a producer for the movie “Freedom’s Path” confirmed that Dave Halls was fired from the 2019 production after a crew member suffered a minor injury “when a gun was unexpectedly discharged.” The producer, who asked not to be identified by name, wrote that Halls “was removed from the set immediately.” Production did not resume until Halls was gone.

His firing from “Freedom’s Path” was first reported by CNN. Halls has not returned phone calls and email messages seeking comment.

The producer is the second person to air doubts about Halls’ safety record. On Sunday, another crew member who worked with Halls said she raised concerns about him in 2019.

Maggie Goll, a prop maker and licensed pyrotechnician, said in a statement that she filed an internal complaint with the executive producers of Hulu’s “Into the Dark” series over Halls’ behavior. Goll said in a phone interview that Halls disregarded safety protocols for weapons and pyrotechnics and tried to continue filming after the supervising pyrotechnician, who was diabetic, lost consciousness on set.

The fatal shooting and previous experiences point to larger safety issues, Goll said, adding that crew safety was a top issue in recent contract negotiations between a union that represents film and TV workers and a major producers’ group.

“This situation is not about Dave Halls. ... It’s in no way one person’s fault,” she said. “It’s a bigger conversation about safety on set and what we are trying to achieve with that culture.”


https://i.dailymail.co.uk/1s/2021/10/23/03/49533361-10121545-image-m-28_1634954576885.jpg


A search warrant released Friday said that armorer Hannah Gutierrez laid out three prop guns on a cart outside the filming location, and assistant director Dave Halls grabbed the gun from the cart and brought it inside to Baldwin


In an email sent to “Rust” crew members over the weekend, the movie’s production team confirmed that work on the Western has been suspended at least until the investigation is complete. The team said it is working with law enforcement and conducting its own internal safety review. The production company is also offering grief counseling.

The email suggested that work on the film could resume at some point.

“Although our hearts are broken, and it is hard to see beyond the horizon, this is, at the moment, a pause rather than an end,” the email read.

The sheriff’s investigation continued Monday, and new court documents showed that authorities seized three black revolvers, ammunition boxes, a fanny pack with ammunition, several spent casings, two leather gun belts with holsters, articles of clothing and swabs of what were believed to be blood.

No charges have been filed. Prosecutors and law enforcement officers were expected to provide an update on the investigation Wednesday.

Moments before the shooting, Baldwin was explaining how he was going to draw the revolver from his holster and where his arm would be positioned, court records show.

The actor had been told that the gun was safe to use for the rehearsal of a scene in which he was supposed to pull out the weapon while sitting in a church pew and point it at the camera, the records said.

Cameraman Reid Russell told a detective that he was unsure whether the weapon was checked before it was handed to Baldwin, and he did not know why the gun was fired.

The camera was not rolling when the gun went off and killed cinematographer Halyna Hutchins, Russell told authorities, according a search warrant affidavit released Sunday.

Authorities have said that Halls had handed the weapon to Baldwin and announced “cold gun,” indicating it was safe.

When asked about how Baldwin treated firearms on the set, Russell said the actor was safe, citing a previous instance when Baldwin made sure a child actor was not near him when a gun was being discharged.

The affidavit released Sunday also included statements by director Joel Souza, who was standing behind Hutchins and was wounded.

It detailed the moments before the shooting and showed that there was turmoil on the set the day of the shooting. Several members of the camera crew walked off the production in a dispute over payment and lodging, Russell said, and he was left with a lot of work to do. Only one camera was available to shoot, and it had to be moved because the light had shifted and there was a shadow.

Souza said he was focused on how the scene would appear on camera. He said he recalled hearing the phrase “cold gun” before the shooting, the affidavit said.

He said the scene did not call for the use of live rounds. After a lunch break, Souza said he was not sure if the firearm had been checked again. Souza was looking over Hutchins’ shoulder when he heard the gunshot, according to the affidavit.

The film’s chief electrician, Serge Svetnoy, blamed producers for Hutchins’ death in an emotional Facebook post on Sunday. Svetnoy said he had worked with Hutchins on multiple films and faulted “negligence and unprofessionalism” among those handling weapons on the set. He said producers hired an inexperienced armorer.

Baldwin, who is known for his roles in “30 Rock” and “The Hunt for Red October” and his impression of former President Donald Trump on “Saturday Night Live,” has described the killing as a “tragic accident.”


TxBSPqJd2_Y


https://twitter.com/AlecBaldwin/status/1350282588515168257

wow! this man truly was arrogant in his ruthlessness ...

[bettye198]

It was announced that the victim's next project was a documentary about pedophile rings. Hmmm:sherlock:

[iota]

even Will Smith checks for gun safety

:facepalm:



dSgeI9dLO9g


there is also video of Clint Eastwood doing the same

:sherlock:

[Pam]

Something is also too timely, orderly, tied to the hottest dark issues, diversionary, triggering, button pushing..... etc.... and by actors. AND, the list of just as fake, TIMELY and even bigger total lie psyop events is getting very long.

This whole thing makes me notice that the conspiracy crowd is now easy to predict and use. They are now trained and will do exactly as expected when baited and have become their own category of exploitable gullibility. Has the conspiracy crowd provided the proof of death first before running off to the 'make connections' races? It will be telling if a funeral will be up-played or ignored.

Just saying. I suspect everything with any media/social impact these days.

Great observation. Every system, every ideology, every organization becomes corrupted and cliche eventually no matter how good and genuine it started out to be.

[Mark (Star Mariner)]

Adam Carolla roasting Alec Baldwin for being best buddies with Epstein:

https://media.128ducks.com/file_store/d8bee14ccbd2928aaccbdcf82fd5927a3ad55de796058a4031582a1646728781.mp4

[Pam]

I'll bet you a donut that reality is twisted in any way necessary to find Alec Baldwin not in any way accountable (or only minimally,certainly not enough for any charges whatsoever) for his actions. Bet he might even be excused by cancel culture. Even little kids who find mom and dads gun and accidently shoot someone are held accountable to some degree, but he won't be. Gavin will make sure he is covered.

[Journeyman]

Something is also too timely, orderly, tied to the hottest dark issues, diversionary, triggering, button pushing..... etc.... and by actors. AND, the list of just as fake, TIMELY and even bigger total lie psyop events is getting very long.

This whole thing makes me notice that the conspiracy crowd is now easy to predict and use. They are now trained and will do exactly as expected when baited and have become their own category of exploitable gullibility. Has the conspiracy crowd provided the proof of death first before running off to the 'make connections' races? It will be telling if a funeral will be up-played or ignored.

Just saying. I suspect everything with any media/social impact these days.

I feel the same way. These events seem to crave our attention, breadcrumbs are laid out neatly for us to follow. Baldwin's prior tweets are ridiculously 'on the nose' in regard to a future accidental shooting. There's even several rabbit holes to dart down on the back of this. Is it related to US politics, Baldwin's spats with Trump, Gun control, Hollyweird antics etc etc. The guy from Supernatural is in the movie so there's another set of syncs to look for. etc etc.

I can see all the different directions to go and in the past I'd have been happily digging through different sources trying to put it together, but to what end? This looks scripted, it almost screams so. So why play the role of intrepid investigator in a scripted production, an unpaid one at that?

I like this take on all the different rabbit holes and the never ending search for truth they represent:

G_asE3NR8mU

[scotslad]

Some Qs.

1. What is the firearms law regarding storing ammunition on a film production and was it broken?
2. What is the firearms law regarding loading ammunition on a film production and was it broken?
3. What is the firearms law regarding handling guns on a film production and was it broken?
4. What is the firearms law regarding firing ammunition on a film production and was it broken?
5. What are actors union rules and requirements re firearms?
6. Is there a contract outlining firearm team's roles and responsibilities and scheduled duties?
7. Are forms completed, signed and dated each time a prop gun or ammo was taken out of storage?
8. Are blank ammo clearly identified/marked and are Live ammo clearly identified/marked?
9. What are the films backers insurance requirements and contractual requirements re firearms?
10. What procedures and policies were followed daily? Proof?
11. Who loaded the gun?
12. Was the gun declared safe when handed to A Baldwin? Witnesses?
13. What training and gun safety inductions did each member of the production team get taken through?
14. What is the local, state, national legal requirement in terms of safety training and gun handling?
15. What safety precautions did A. Baldwin take once handed the gun?
16. Why did he point the gun at someone not scripted to be shot at in the film?
17. Are there more than one party, organisation and company guilty in failing to follow the law/process?

EEEEeeeeee me, what a mess.

Hmmmm.

[melissanederland]

He shot her in a chapel too - https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10131519/Electrician-describes-harrowing-moment-held-dying-Halyna-Hutchins-arms-shot.html

[Gracy]

Some Qs.

1. What is the firearms law regarding storing ammunition on a film production and was it broken?
2. What is the firearms law regarding loading ammunition on a film production and was it broken?
3. What is the firearms law regarding handling guns on a film production and was it broken?
4. What is the firearms law regarding firing ammunition on a film production and was it broken?
5. What are actors union rules and requirements re firearms?
6. Is there a contract outlining firearm team's roles and responsibilities and scheduled duties?
7. Are forms completed, signed and dated each time a prop gun or ammo was taken out of storage?
8. Are blank ammo clearly identified/marked and are Live ammo clearly identified/marked?
9. What are the films backers insurance requirements and contractual requirements re firearms?
10. What procedures and policies were followed daily? Proof?
11. Who loaded the gun?
12. Was the gun declared safe when handed to A Baldwin? Witnesses?
13. What training and gun safety inductions did each member of the production team get taken through?
14. What is the local, state, national legal requirement in terms of safety training and gun handling?
15. What safety precautions did A. Baldwin take once handed the gun?
16. Why did he point the gun at someone not scripted to be shot at in the film?
17. Are there more than one party, organisation and company guilty in failing to follow the law/process?

EEEEeeeeee me, what a mess.

Hmmmm.

There’s a saying that planes don’t go down because just one thing goes wrong, planes go down when multiple things go wrong.

[iota]

apologies in advance for the length, but it is very informative and worth the read


Some Qs.

1. What is the firearms law regarding storing ammunition on a film production and was it broken?
2. What is the firearms law regarding loading ammunition on a film production and was it broken?
3. What is the firearms law regarding handling guns on a film production and was it broken?
4. What is the firearms law regarding firing ammunition on a film production and was it broken?
5. What are actors union rules and requirements re firearms?
6. Is there a contract outlining firearm team's roles and responsibilities and scheduled duties?
7. Are forms completed, signed and dated each time a prop gun or ammo was taken out of storage?
8. Are blank ammo clearly identified/marked and are Live ammo clearly identified/marked?
9. What are the films backers insurance requirements and contractual requirements re firearms?
10. What procedures and policies were followed daily? Proof?
11. Who loaded the gun?
12. Was the gun declared safe when handed to A Baldwin? Witnesses?
13. What training and gun safety inductions did each member of the production team get taken through?
14. What is the local, state, national legal requirement in terms of safety training and gun handling?
15. What safety precautions did A. Baldwin take once handed the gun?

16. Why did he point the gun at someone not scripted to be shot at in the film?

17. Are there more than one party, organisation and company guilty in failing to follow the law/process?

EEEEeeeeee me, what a mess.

Hmmmm.

THAT one stood out for me more than ALL of them?

i've only ever held a gun in my hand twice, my fiancé had INSISTED that i at least know how to handle a gun and took me to the shooting range both times to practice

BOTH times BEFORE putting the gun in my hands, he very seriously enjoined me:


"NEVER, EVER point a gun at ANYONE

you only point a gun at someone you intend to kill"

the way that was emphasized to me, occurred to me as something that is COMMONLY said to all novices, i've heard these words said almost exactly even movies

as for the onset of the questions? here is a LEGAL Analysis

well worth the time


https://c2.legalinsurrection.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/10/Alec-Baldwin-Shooting-New-Mexico-e1634933474952.png

"Hey folks, I’m Attorney Andrew Branca, for Law of Self Defense.

Today I’d like to share with you a tragic story out of New Mexico involving the actor Alec Baldwin (perhaps best known for his small but powerful role in the 1992 movie “Glengarry Glenn Ross”—“coffee is for closers!”—and his long-standing role as boss Jack Donaghy on the television program “30 Rock.”)

THE TRAGIC EVENT

I’ll briefly quote from a New York Times story on the event:

Alec Baldwin discharged a prop firearm on the set of a Western he was making in New Mexico on Thursday, killing the film’s director of photography and wounding the movie’s director, the authorities said.

The cinematographer, Halyna Hutchins, 42, was killed, and the director, Joel Souza, 48, was injured … . The circumstances of the shooting are under investigation.

It’s separately reported that Alec Baldwin was also a co-producer of the movie."

VIDEO:

https://player.vimeo.com/video/637994040?h=95fad3ca49

Legal Analysis: Does Alec Baldwin Have Criminal Exposure After Shooting Woman Dead In Apparent Mistake?
Innocent Accident, or Involuntary Manslaughter?


THE TRAGIC EVENT

I’ll briefly quote from a New York Times story on the event:

Alec Baldwin discharged a prop firearm on the set of a Western he was making in New Mexico on Thursday, killing the film’s director of photography and wounding the movie’s director, the authorities said.

The cinematographer, Halyna Hutchins, 42, was killed, and the director, Joel Souza, 48, was injured … . The circumstances of the shooting are under investigation.

It’s separately reported that Alec Baldwin was also a co-producer of the movie.


WAS THIS AN ACCIDENT? NEGLIGENCE? RECKLESSNESS/INVOLUNTARY MANSLAUGHTER?

"...Under New Mexico law involuntary manslaughter is a fourth-degree felony normally punishable by up to 18 months in prison and a $5,000 fine.

The most common form of involuntary manslaughter committed generally is drunk driving resulting in a fatality, but of course a firearm being handled lawfully but “without due caution and circumspection” that results in a death fits the statutory definition equally well.

So, in the shooting death of Ms. Hutchins by Alec Baldwin, are we looking at an accident, free of legal liability, or an act of negligence carrying civil liability, or a criminally reckless killing (an involuntary manslaughter) good for a felony prison sentence? What factors do we consider in distinguishing between accident and negligence and reckless killing?

... (continued in full article sourced at the end)

THE LEGAL DEFENSE OF ACCIDENT

Legally speaking the defense of accident applies when the harm caused could not have been foreseen by the person who caused the harm, and who was otherwise acting in a normal and non-negligent manner...."

NEGLIGENCE CREATES CIVIL LIABILITY

Liability is acquired, however, if you were acting negligently when you caused the harm.

For example, imagine that you were driving down a neighborhood road with a speed limit of 25 miles per hour. You’re in a bit of a hurry, however, so you’re driving at a solid 35 miles per hour. There’s no reason for you to think, and you don’t think that you’re creating any exceptional risk by driving a bit over the speed limit—heck, plenty of the people in the neighborhood do so all the time. Suddenly, however, a child dashes out into the street, and that 10 miles per hour over the limit is what prevents you from stopping before your vehicle hits and kills the child.

Here you were not acting in a normal and non-negligent manner. We all have a generalized legal duty to not cause unjustified harm to others. Your intentional disregard of the stated speed limit violated that legal duty, even though you did not know you were creating an exceptional risk of death.

By violating that generalized legal duty to not cause harm to others you were acting negligently, and your negligence means that you’ve acquired at least civil liability for the death you caused by your negligent conduct.

The parents would presumably sue you for wrongful death in civil court, and win a judgment as the result of your negligent conduct.

RECKLESSNESS CREATES CRIMINAL LIABILITY

Even then, however, you don’t necessarily have criminal liability for the child’s death. Criminal liability requires more than mere negligence—the failure to meet a duty to not cause harm.

Criminal liability requires recklessness.

Recklessness occurs when you not only violate a legal duty to not cause harm, but you explicitly know you are doing so, and you intentionally disregard that risk.

... (continued in full article sourced at the end)


SO WHAT WAS IT? ACCIDENT, NEGLIGENCE, OR RECKLESSNESS?

So, with that legal foundation in mind, what can we make of Alec Baldwin’s shooting death of Ms. Hutchins? Could it have been an innocent accident? Or is it merely civil negligence? Or is it criminal recklessness, and involuntary manslaughter? The answer will, of course, depend on what the facts are ultimately turnout to be, but we can certainly explore the range of outcomes that would be on the table.

Innocent accidents can happen with firearms, but they are rare—and the reason they are rare is that firearms are recognized legally as inherently dangerous instruments, and therefore the standard of care for handling them is very high.

ACCIDENT: WHAT THAT WOULD LOOK LIKE IN THIS CASE

What might an genuine accident with a handgun look like? Well, imagine a gun that has an unseen defect, such that when the barrel is brought up to the horizontal position the gun discharges without any press of the trigger.

This is clearly not how a gun is supposed to fire, nor would any reasonable person expect a gun to fire under such circumstances.

If the gun being handled by Alec Baldwin is found to have such a defect, and his handling of the gun was otherwise non-negligent, he would have a good argument that the gun discharging and killing Ms. Hutchins was a genuine accident for which he should bear no civil or criminal liability.

NEGLIGENCE: WHAT THAT WOULD LOOK LIKE IN THIS CASE

On the other hand, a defective gun doesn’t necessarily mean there was no negligence involved, and if there is negligence there cannot be an innocent accident and zero legal liability—there must, at least, be civil liability.

In our hypothetical with the defective gun, for example, it may be true that the discharge of the gun was not foreseeable by Alec Baldwin, and therefore not really in his control—but the direction in which the gun was pointed certainly was in his control.

The death of Ms. Hutchins by the discharge of the gun could not have occurred had the gun not been pointed at her—and that pointing of the gun at her would certainly seem to constitute negligence.

... (continued in full article sourced at the end)


RECKLESSNESS: WHAT THAT WOULD LOOK LIKE IN THIS CASE

But the potential liability doesn’t end there, because we must also consider the possibility that the killing was the result not of innocent accident, and not merely of civil negligence, but rather the result of criminal recklessness.

Let’s change our hypothetical to remove the defect from the gun. Now the gun operates normally, and will not discharge unless the trigger is depressed. Imagine also that some of the news reporting of this event accurately describes the discharge of the weapon as follows.

Let me be clear—I have no idea if what I’m about to describe will turn out to accurately describe the events in this case. I read such a description of the events online, but have no idea if the person providing that description has any idea what they are talking about. Here we’re using that description of events not as a claim that they represent what actually happened, but merely as a hypothetical to explore the legal issues that could arise in this case.

The day was running long, the actors and crew were getting tired, another scene had to be shot yet again, and in an effort to add some levity to the circumstances Alec Baldwin, holding a firearm in his hands that he believed to be unloaded, jokingly told the director of photography Ms. Hutchins and director Joel Souza, “We have to shoot that scene again? How about if I just shoot you both, instead.” He then points the firearm at them and depresses the trigger, resulting in the gun discharging, killing Ms. Hutchins, and wounding Mr. Souza.

In that last hypothetical we have no innocent accident, and we have no mere civil negligence—instead, we have, with the pointing of the weapon at the victims and the deliberate press of the trigger, criminal recklessness.

The gun did not go off for unforeseeable reasons, such as a hidden defect. The gun discharged because it operated as designed—to fire when the trigger is depressed. Of course, the gun must be loaded when the trigger is depressed in order to cause harm—but as the tragic consequences here amply demonstrate, the gun was loaded. It would be the duty of the person wielding the gun to ensure it was unloaded if they wished to cause no harm when they depressed the trigger—and clearly that duty was not met.

Second, anyone handling an inherently dangerous object such as a firearm would be presumed to possess the safety knowledge needed to handle that firearm safely around others—a claim of ignorance is no defense when one is handling inherently dangerous objects.

That guns are inherently dangerous is common knowledge presumed to be known to everyone. That the rounds fired come out of the muzzle and travel with lethal force and distance is also common knowledge presumed to be known to everyone. That guns discharge when their triggers are depressed is also common knowledge presumed to be known to everyone.... (continued in full article sourced at the end)

so, Alec Baldwin was both the actor handling the firearm when it discharged—and an actor might argue that he is at the “bottom” of the safety responsibility ladder for something like a movie set—but he was also a co-producer for the film—which would place him at the “top” of the safety responsibility ladder.

In theory, an actor at the “bottom” and the producer at the “top” might each point their finger at each other in the case of a tragic event like this. That is, the actor might argue that the producer ought to have had better safety protocols in place, and the producer might argue that the actor had the ultimately responsibility for safe handling of the firearm.

In this case, however, Alec Baldwin occupies both seats. So he can point his finger in this manner if he wishes, but ultimately he’ll be pointing it at himself.

And this implication could well apply not merely in the civil law context, within the scope of negligence, but also within the criminal law context, within the scope of recklessness and involuntary manslaughter.

... (continued in full article sourced at the end)

"Until next time:

REMEMBER

You carry a gun so you’re hard to kill.

Know the law so you’re hard to convict.


source: https://legalinsurrection.com/2021/10/legal-analysis-does-alec-baldwin-have-criminal-exposure-after-shooting-woman-dead-in-apparent-mistake/

:sherlock:

it is always the "spin" that muddies the waters, things become much clearer when you just stick to the facts

as far as i can tell? the legal process has deteriorated to such a degree as to make facts almost inconsequential

they seem to just focus on the outcome desired, and then "spin" the facts to provide that (desired) outcome

things would be much simpler if operated from the following basis:

I alone, am responsible for what I DO

Others (someone else) is responsible for what THEY do

now there can be MULTIPLE people who EACH will be responsible

BUT RESPONSIBILITY in anyone else does NOT get cancelled out

[Satori]

At a minimum there is civil liability. The civil aspect will settle out of court and maybe without a lawsuit even being filed. But, filing a complaint will add to the media coverage and in turn the pressure to settle and get this to go away ASAP.

Any criminal charges and liability will not depend on the facts and the law--even though it should. Rather, that will depend on the discretion of the district attorney. That discretion will be informed, or controlled, by the powers-that-be and the pressure, or lack thereof, brought on the DA to prosecute.

In my view no criminal charges will be filed against Baldwin, not even negligent or reckless manslaughter. Whether the DA goes after a particular person will depend on how much political power the person who is the target of the investigation has to prevent prosecution.

[iota]

haha! we were both posting at exact same time!


At a minimum there is civil liability. The civil aspect will settle out of court and maybe without a lawsuit even being filed. But, filing a complaint will add to the media coverage and in turn the pressure to settle and get this to go away ASAP.

Any criminal charges and liability will not depend on the facts and the law--even though it should. Rather, that will depend on the discretion of the district attorney. That discretion will be informed, or controlled, by the powers-that-be and the pressure, or lack thereof, brought on the DA to prosecute.

In my view no criminal charges will be filed against Baldwin, not even negligent or reckless manslaughter. Whether the DA goes after a particular person will depend on how much political power the person who is the target of the investigation has to prevent prosecution.

we, here all KNOW what you just stated is true, however, if they get away with THAT?

it will be BECAUSE the people ALLOW that

here is a pertinent comment i read:



If that’s not enough, there are a few people sitting in NM prisons as we speak. Careless and grabass gun handling at a party and the kill a friend.

Careless and reckless behavior resulting in death. Intent is not needed because the behavior itself is so dangerous.

therefore, ANY John Doe can stand up and speak and create a ruckus to reflect BADLY on the DA, and expose exactly what he is doing

at the very least? anyone wanting to run against him next term? will certainly have ammunition, pardon the pun, to use against him

and the truth of the matter is that these issues would be non existent if the people were empowered, and stopped ALLOWING themselves to be led by the nose and "spun" to every tune played for them

the fact that the people DO indeed hold the power IS the VERY reason WHY we will see SO much "spin" on this! it is certainly easier for them to have a majority "spun" to THEIR tune to ensure their objective prevails

[Bill Ryan]

At a minimum there is civil liability. The civil aspect will settle out of court and maybe without a lawsuit even being filed. But, filing a complaint will add to the media coverage and in turn the pressure to settle and get this to go away ASAP.

Any criminal charges and liability will not depend on the facts and the law--even though it should. Rather, that will depend on the discretion of the district attorney. That discretion will be informed, or controlled, by the powers-that-be and the pressure, or lack thereof, brought on the DA to prosecute.

In my view no criminal charges will be filed against Baldwin, not even negligent or reckless manslaughter. Whether the DA goes after a particular person will depend on how much political power the person who is the target of the investigation has to prevent prosecution.Thanks. As a highly experienced New Mexico attorney, I was quietly hoping you'd offer a well-informed opinion. Not many contributors would say (or be allowed to say!) anything like that on CNN.

I have been following this closely, simply because in many ways it may belong more under The Human Condition (https://projectavalon.net/forum4/forumdisplay.php?178-The-Human-Condition) than Current Events (https://projectavalon.net/forum4/forumdisplay.php?105-Current-Events). There are ironies involved of Shakespearean magnitude.

And the whole thing is a dog's breakfast of a huge perfect storm of combined domino-chain serious negligence on behalf of at least three people. (We don't even know yet how many. It could well be several more.)

Who may get charged, or sued in a civil case (though Baldwin, a wealthy man, must be a target for multi-million $$$ damages to compensate for the loss of Halyna Hutchins' future lifetime earnings), is anyone's guess.

[iota]

Who may get charged, or sued in a civil case (though Baldwin, a wealthy man, must be a target for multi-million $$$ damages to compensate for the loss of Halyna Hutchins' future lifetime earnings), is anyone's guess.

i'm sure the Clinton Foundation could cover that easily for a friend

:cash::cash::cash:

[Satori]

At a minimum there is civil liability. The civil aspect will settle out of court and maybe without a lawsuit even being filed. But, filing a complaint will add to the media coverage and in turn the pressure to settle and get this to go away ASAP.

Any criminal charges and liability will not depend on the facts and the law--even though it should. Rather, that will depend on the discretion of the district attorney. That discretion will be informed, or controlled, by the powers-that-be and the pressure, or lack thereof, brought on the DA to prosecute.

In my view no criminal charges will be filed against Baldwin, not even negligent or reckless manslaughter. Whether the DA goes after a particular person will depend on how much political power the person who is the target of the investigation has to prevent prosecution.Thanks. As a highly experienced New Mexico attorney, I was quietly hoping you'd offer a well-informed opinion. Not many contributors would say (or be allowed to say!) anything like that on CNN.

I have been following this closely, simply because in many ways it may belong more under The Human Condition (https://projectavalon.net/forum4/forumdisplay.php?178-The-Human-Condition) than Current Events (https://projectavalon.net/forum4/forumdisplay.php?105-Current-Events). There are ironies involved of Shakespearean magnitude.

And the whole thing is a dog's breakfast of a huge perfect storm of combined domino-chain serious negligence on behalf of at least three people. (We don't even know yet how many. It could well be several more.)

Who may get charged, or sued in a civil case (though Baldwin, a wealthy man, must be a target for multi-million $$$ damages to compensate for the loss of Halyna Hutchins' future lifetime earnings), is anyone's guess.

There is also very likely insurance that will provide a defense to Baldwin, and the other named co-insureds, and also provide coverage for the civil liability and monetary damages for Baldwin and the other named insured persons who bear, or may bear, responsibility. If there is insurance, and I have to believe there is, then Baldwin and any others will not incur any personal expense for this, unless the available insurance is not enough to cover the recoverable damages for the deceased. And, let us not forget the man who took a bullet or fragment to the shoulder. His damages are less, to be sure, but he did incur pain and suffering, as well as permanent scarring.

Forgive me, but my cynicism comes through from time-to-time on matters like this. I've lived in NM 40 or so years and I've seen how the criminal "justice" system works here when the high and mighty are involved. Pretty much the same it works everywhere else.

To be clear, there may not be any criminal responsibility on Baldwin's part, and I do not mean to imply that I think there is and that he will be getting away with murder or manslaughter. None of us here have sufficient information to conclude a crime was committed. But, at a minimum, acts (plural) of careless disregard and gross, reckless negligence occurred and there is plenty enough information for us to reach that conclusion. Not to mention common sense.

If the DA is persuaded that the acts involved in this tragic event rise to the level of a crime, then the DA should either file a criminal complaint or take it to a grand jury. My belief is that will not happen as to Baldwin, but it may happen as to some lower hanging fruit.

[TomKat]

I wish someone would investigate how real bullets end up in prop guns. I think that's how Bruce Lee's son, Brandon, was killed.

[Satori]

I wish someone would investigate how real bullets end up in prop guns. I think that's how Bruce Lee's son, Brandon, was killed.

For what it's worth: Brandon Lee was not killed by an actual bullet. He was killed by negligence on the part of the armorer (spelling) or prop man when a fragment in the chamber dislodged from the "prop gun". There are differing views on how that happened. That prop man never worked again in any capacity in the industry.

Lee was also supposed to be wearing a vest that he failed to put on, which contributed to his death. Further, he was an actor playing in the scene and had assumed some risk of an injury.

Ms. Hutchins, in my opinion, did not assume that type of risk and did not contribute to her death.

[TargeT]

Guess who was responsible for the gun...........

like.. Who thought this was a qualified "armorer" ???

https://twitter.com/TrevorSutcliffe/status/1451760090088755205?s=20


I saw this and... just... yeah, obviously.

[Satori]

Guess who was responsible for the gun...........

like.. Who thought this was a qualified "armorer" ???

https://twitter.com/TrevorSutcliffe/status/1451760090088755205?s=20


I saw this and... just... yeah, obviously.


How do we reconcile these two presentations on the subject?:

Character actor says that he felt unsafe on the set of RUST, but praised the 24 year old armorer:

https://www.msn.com/en-us/movies/news/rust-actor-says-he-felt-movie-set-was-life-threatening-before-fatal-shooting/ar-AAPYHr6?ocid=msedgdhp&pc=U531


It's all political:


https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/in-fatal-shooting-some-political-foes-take-aim-at-baldwin/ar-AAPX67f?ocid=msedgdhp&pc=U531

[TargeT]

How do we reconcile these two presentations on the subject?:

Character actor says that he felt unsafe on the set of RUST, but praised the 24 year old armorer:

https://www.msn.com/en-us/movies/news/rust-actor-says-he-felt-movie-set-was-life-threatening-before-fatal-shooting/ar-AAPYHr6?ocid=msedgdhp&pc=U531


It's all political:


https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/in-fatal-shooting-some-political-foes-take-aim-at-baldwin/ar-AAPX67f?ocid=msedgdhp&pc=U531

2 previous misfires... any "armorer" I know of would have been ****ing fired RIGHT away, not to mention that blanks and live rounds were stored together, and there were several loose rounds found as well as boxxed live ammo.... live ammo should never be on the set.

reported use of prop guns for target practice, on set.... shooting cans etc....

negligence in the highest order IMO.

also... 24?

your not even allowed to rent a car b4 25..........

[iota]

47776


Mathew Hutchin's Instagram photo with the caption

"We miss you Halyna"

the BBC reports:

"In a statement read at a candlelight vigil on Saturday, Hutchins's husband Matthew called his wife's death "an enormous loss".

He also posted photos of the pair with their nine-year-old son.

In an Instagram post, Baldwin's wife Hilaria said "my heart is with Halyna".

"
It's impossible to express the shock and heartache of such a tragic incident,"

she wrote. Baldwin's co-star Jensen Ackles also paid tribute to Hutchins.

"I'm not even sure where to start," he wrote. "This has been a tragedy of epic proportions that we are all still processing.

"There just aren't enough words to express what an immense loss this is. She will be incredibly missed by all of us who knew and admired her."

the story with legal document references:

https://www.bbc.com/news/entertainment-arts-59035483


https://media-cldnry.s-nbcnews.com/image/upload/t_fit-560w,f_auto,q_auto:best/rockcms/2021-10/211022-rust-set-ew-553p-f12325.jpg


NBC reports:

"The prop gun used in the fatal shooting of the cinematographer of the movie Alec Baldwin was producing had misfired before on the set, sources familiar with the situation told NBC News Friday.

Just a few hours before Baldwin fired the shot that killed the highly regarded cinematographer, Halyna Hutchins, and also wounded the director, Joel Souza, several members of the crew walked off the set of “Rust” because of safety concerns, the sources said.

The disclosure came as investigators probing the tragedy at the Bonanza Ranch in New Mexico were seeking to question the three workers who were supposed to make sure Baldwin was firing blanks, sources said.

The production company said in a statement Friday that the "safety of our cast and crew is the top priority of Rust Productions and everyone associated with the company. Though we were not made aware of any official complaints concerning weapon or prop safety on set, we will be conducting an internal review of our procedures while production is shut down."

The workers based in and around Albuquerque appeared to have ties to the local film industry before they were hired to work on Baldwin’s western, records show.

Their names were listed on the call sheet for Thursday, the day of fatal shooting, which NBC News obtained from one of the entities cooperating with police."

NBC News is withholding their names because police have not characterized the investigation into the deadly incident outside Santa Fe as an accident investigation or a criminal probe.

But those listed on the call sheets as the “property master, property key assistant/armorer, and property assistant” all bear the responsibility of making sure the weapons used in the movie are secure and safe to use, experts said.

Property masters, especially the armorers, on big movie sets are generally very experienced, but “Rust” was a low-budget movie, said Tobey Bayes, business agent for IATSE Local 44 in Hollywood.

armorers are some of the 7,000 members of the L.A. based IATSE local. There aren't 7,000 armorers in the 44."

Source with two videos from NBC here:

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/prop-gun-alec-baldwin-use-fire-fatal-shot-misfired-rcna3635


no facts nor outcome of any legal process can ever make sense of this terrible tragedy nor compensate a loss that is immesurable

after all is said and done, the one primarily affected and CLEAR victim in this situation?

is the little boy, who will now grow up without his mother

:bearhug:

[Hym]

I've been a member of this union for 7 years, with but a few months left, choosing to leave at the end of my dues paid year. This is the worst way to leave because I will remember the loss of that beautiful soul marking the stark nature of the time.

This all has been a very predictable outcome, what with watching a union do it's best to destroy itself.

When the ultimate predator, a major, long term sociopath who ran the union was finally kicked out, not one single, sane member believed that any thing had changed. Barefoot and walking on glass, the last shoe had dropped a decade ago.....and the fools who still "believed" the barrel chested monkey from Wales being replaced with a member of the opposite sex would make any difference at all, soon were reminded that corruption has no creed, no sexual identity, nor preference to mark it's odor....Burn Hollywood Burn.

Most of the comments here on this thread have been on target, except for the reposts of troll/intel (often the same beast) posts from social media platforms, intimating that the wife of a Clinton corporate lawyer would ever expose the Clintons crimes. Nonsense, and working for Alec Baldwin while suggesting that? How about thinking why anyone would post that shyte, without using some common sense.

Some of the other posts are just keyboarding, and to those of us in film, especially those of us who are experienced with weapons, safety and safety in film won't waste too much time explaining the simplicity of how dangerous that entire production was. To us, and the large number of us leaving or who have left this local film union, the loss of another life was just waiting to happen.....and it easily could have been prevented.

For those of us who knew Imogene, the owner of the ranch who just passed away, Oct.4, we see her passing as eerily connected to a death on her land. I choose to remember my last talk with her as she tried to sell me a gaudy, oversized chandelier made out of antlers....even as I protested to her that the low ceilings in this adobe home would only accommodate Tarzan swinging from room to room....got her to laugh.

Those of us who have experienced the NM local 480's non-union, denigrating, career limiting, pay to play, black listing know that many out of state productions see the state's film industry as weak and easily exploitable. The producers of "Rust" knew that they could get away with not one actionable complaint against it by the union.

And the union NOW complaining of all of the dangerous actions of the crew? Where the hell was the on-set, UNION shop steward, and where was the union when the film crew left because they hadn't been paid for weeks, nor offered the nearby hotel accommodations necessary to limit travel after a long work day?

Add on the governor of the state grandstanding and threatening the union by saying that her "expectation is the industry better step up and identify any number of additional improvements and safeguards," needed on set, is the height of hypocrisy. So, after having paid off an accuser for sexual harassment allegations against her she found time to stick her politics into something she knows NOTHING about. Hey gov., you just lost a large chunk of union voters there. Thanks for reminding the members of local 480 how you have never been part of the solution, like every other politician other than Gary Johnson, knowing the depth of pay to play employed by the union for decades. Silence is complicity.

THE PRODUCERS OF THE MOVIE KNEW THAT, BAR THE DEATH OF A CREW MEMBER, THE UNION WOULD INSIST ON VERY LITTLE IN SUPPORT OF UNION MEMBERS being exploited by any production, either out of state or in state. Of course they did not think that they would be caught being so neglectful that a death would happen, but they rolled the dice and they lost big time anyway, regardless of the foreseeable probabilities of serious accidents happening.

The truth from those of us working, boots on the ground, members of this union is that it has taken a lot of collusion between the long history of parasitic union leadership and all of the union scum left in positions of power to allow this to happen. In fact, it has taken a lot of payoffs, threats, and control politics for all of the many financial crimes, deliberately negligent work conditions and career ending discrimination to have gone UNREPORTED for so long.

Here is my previous post on this thread...

https://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?116613-Alec-Baldwin-Fired-Prop-Gun-That-Kills-1-on-Set-of-Rust&p=1459294&viewfull=1#post1459294

[Did You See Them]

Do we know the make and model of the gun ?
If it were a Colt SAA ( single action army revolver ) they have to be cocked (4 clicks) before discharging.
The only exception really is when holstered- hence a "cowboy" load - only 5 bullets in the gun. The hammer then rests on an empty chamber when holstered. This was to ensure that whilst working that if by accident the hammer is accidentally hit it is not resting on a live round shooting the owner in the foot. Very hard for this type of weapon to misfire.

S043pY7MAxQ

[ExomatrixTV]

Alec Baldwin Faces Possible Criminal Charges After Shooting Death Of Crewmember:

TgfWXnYXaGU

[boja]

Who the Hell put a "LIVE ROUND" in a film prop ???

MURDER springs to mind !

[Did You See Them]

Live statement now from Sheriffs Office
r7e9T9i9GtU

[Bill Ryan]

to those of us in film, especially those of us who are experienced with weapons, safety and safety in film won't waste too much time explaining the simplicity of how dangerous that entire production was. To us, and the large number of us leaving or who have left this local film union, the loss of another life was just waiting to happen.....and it easily could have been prevented.No kidding.

A couple of inputs here, if I may:

I've watched a number of interviews with attorneys and Hollywood safety professionals about this unfathomable debacle. But here's a video from a former Green Beret. He clearly wasn't all that familiar with it (he thought Halyna Hutchins must have been an actress), but everything else he got exactly 100% right. It's worth watching.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w8-4XttrzgI
And regarding responsibility, which seems to rest with quite a few people, a super-strong (and utterly obvious!) point was made here. But I've not heard it mentioned by anyone else.
“If you’re capable of memorizing 120 pages of dialogue, you can memorize four lines of gun safety,” special effects and firearms expert Steve Wolf told The New York Post. (https://nypost.com/2021/10/25/no-denying-alec-baldwins-role-in-shooting-mishap-tragedy/)
“If that scene required Baldwin to put the gun to his head and pull the trigger, I’m sure he would have taken a look inside the gun.”
Say no more. That's checkmate.

I'm no gun veteran, but I can absolutely understand and appreciate the four lines of gun safety. They're a common-sense mantra. You don't mess with that. As the Green Beret said in the video above, you thoroughly check a gun that's been handed to you even if you're standing next to the guy who DID hand it to you and watched him check it himself moments earlier. You just do it again.

At first I drifted past this story, but then caught up with it in detail once I started to hear more about the giant clusterf*ck that had somehow happened. It's about guns, for sure, but the higher-level issues are about safety protocols, knowledge, training, and following all that with zero compromise.

The crossover for me is this. I'm an experienced mountaineer, and in all my mountaineering and rock climbing years, including doing some fairly serious things in very remote places, I've never had an accident happen to myself or anyone I was ever with. I'm proud of that, but I know why it is. It's just attention to detail, never getting complacent.

In mountaineering, specially when climbing with ropes, the protocols are similar to those of gun handling. You check EVERYTHING. All the time, to the very best degree that you can. And you ask others you're with to check things too. If they have a concern, you listen very carefully.

If a friend tells me a knot is tied or a karabiner (metal snaplink connector) is screwed tight shut, even if I've known and trusted that friend for years, I also take a good look myself if I'm in a position to do so. It becomes instinct. And there's no disrespect. I'd want him or her to do exactly the same.

I wrote earlier (https://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?116613-Alec-Baldwin-Fired-Prop-Gun-That-Kills-1-on-Set-of-Rust&p=1459685&viewfull=1#post1459685) that this incident was of Shakespearean magnitude with all its tragic ironies. What Shakespeare mastered was that every play he wrote was a seminar for the audience to learn from, and I truly think the same is happening here.

[iota]

this post was being worked on at same time as Bill's ..it IS complementary

i may post info later ... but i've reached my conclusion on Alec

[iota]

to those of us in film, especially those of us who are experienced with weapons, safety and safety in film won't waste too much time explaining the simplicity of how dangerous that entire production was. To us, and the large number of us leaving or who have left this local film union, the loss of another life was just waiting to happen.....and it easily could have been prevented.No kidding.

A couple of inputs here, if I may:

I've watched a number of interviews with attorneys and Hollywood safety professionals about this unfathomable debacle. But here's a video from a former Green Beret. He clearly wasn't all that familiar with it (he thought Halyna Hutchins must have been an actress), but everything else he got exactly 100% right. It's worth watching.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w8-4XttrzgI
And regarding responsibility, which seems to rest with quite a few people, a super-strong (and utterly obvious!) point was made here. But I've not heard it mentioned by anyone else.
“If you’re capable of memorizing 120 pages of dialogue, you can memorize four lines of gun safety,” special effects and firearms expert Steve Wolf told The New York Post. (https://nypost.com/2021/10/25/no-denying-alec-baldwins-role-in-shooting-mishap-tragedy/)
“If that scene required Baldwin to put the gun to his head and pull the trigger, I’m sure he would have taken a look inside the gun.”
Say no more. That's checkmate.



Bill, you struck gold! and honestly this point alone IS the definitive point!

the point of confusion is that BECAUSE of the multiple factors? ~ ALL of which holds great responsibility to whatever extent they do?

then the tendency is once a culpirit is identified? to tunnel vission focus and absolve responsibility on everyone else

THAT is what is causing the endless debates

what i'm saying is:

1. the fact is that irrespective of EVERY single factor named?


“If you don’t point a gun at another human, it won’t kill them. "

AND the REASON he did?

is because AS a human being? he has copnsistently chosen to operate with reckless disregard AS a "norm" in ALL areas of his life

we CAN point out that if he wasn't the type of person to operate as he does? being arrogant? carelessly and recklessly waving a gun around when not even filming? pointing it at another human being? ~ AND firing it?

then he would NOT have made THAT kind of choice > NO ONE would be dead

but he has a HUGE ego, and as i have pointed out earlier, i SERIOULSY doubt that there exists a SINGLE person in his circle of life, that calls him out on it AND continues to call him out on it out of desire to avoid confrontation

and i can say that with just about 100% certainty because he hasn't stopped

EGOS NEED constant AFFIRMATION

so he would have been particularly susceptible and responsive to NEGATIVE feedback from the people in his life

"hey dad? WTH? is it your aim to undermine and emotionally maim me in life?"

"hey hubby? you know how you enjoy sex? well it isnt happening if you're going to talk to me like that!

"hey actor, i love your work man. but the truth is you're a pain in the ass. and as a director, i NEED cooperation, so though you'd be perfect for the part? but i'm going to have to go with someone else"

it is ALL the ALLOWANCE that ENABLED him to continue NOT just unimpeded. but their SILENCE actually allowed him to draw the ERRONEOUS assumption? ~ that he was fine! .. nothing wrong with the way he was developing as a human being

here is just ONE example of the manner he CHOSE to operate in life:

(culminating in a whole LIFETIME of unimpeded negative trajectory)



https://twitter.com/AlecBaldwln____/status/911425278123048960


and speculation isn't needed to know EXACTLY how HE would have "weighed in" on this



https://twitter.com/AlecBaldwln____/status/911427563700006913

sorry about language

from MY perspective? what i've seen withOUT exception?

God/Source/Divine Universe/Higher Self?

has an objective for us LEARN a few things. none of us get an "exemption"

and if the people around such an individual are FAILING to support in THAT "lesson"?

AND the person lacks self awareness or desire to work on one's self?

there comes a point when CHOICE is removed and now the point is going to be made

and it WILL get the point across - but it won't be pretty

Alec Baldwin:


I wonder how it must feel to wrongfully kill someone...


Karma/Universe:


"now you know"

hope that cleared things up for him ...

and i feel for the man ... i've been there (learning)

[Hym]

While standing in for my recertification on lifts, (booms, condors, scissor lifts), I saw we had a group of newbies in the class. I reminded them that if they aren't making mistakes, they are probably not working. This began a back and forth between us about safety, what we do know and learning what we don't....never stepping up in a work situation where we are unskilled and the potential for danger is high.

I said this more because I know the habits of the union in this state to rush new members into trades that they are clueless about and have no training in, and the union is used to promoting and keeping members who follow the dogma of subservience, not safety and a drive to become skilled. Those things are happenstance in a politically weak union like the 480. It is rarely an apprentice to journeyman road that this union travels....and that, on so many levels is dangerous.

The NM union has very ignorantly and often failed to teach safety to cross over members. I'm a quick study, but no one is that quick, nor adept enough to suddenly be thrust into a position of skill wherein their life and the lives of others are at stake.

In fact, I have taken those classes I'd call cross over classes, seminars in the trades I don't do, in order to familiarize myself about safety issues, often learning that in order to be safe and competent in some of those other skills I would need much more training. I have learned enough in those classes to know to stay away, even as I may learn more in the future.

I told my fellow lift trainees that it's not the mistakes we make, but the willingness to spot them before they happen and to correct the ones we make, without hesitation, and sharing the process with anyone they think may also make the same mistake.

In armory there cannot be any mistakes. Zero. That's why constant, 100% adherence to a protocol is life saving.

This is just the reason that I made a solid friend in another builder who, after seeing me quickly laying out and framing some long walls for an outdoor set we were building, came over and measured my walls, my blocks, my mavericks on the ends, etc.. He said "It's not that I don't trust your measurements. I can see you're skilled and you know what your doing. Still, I don't trust your measurements."

He knew I'd get it immediately or I wouldn't get it at all and take him as some control freak. I got it. It shouldn't be that way, but I knew I had met another kindred spirit. I recheck my own measurements all of the time, just as I check the builds for all of the materials used that both break up during stunts and those things that need to be sturdy and prevent injury.

The same goes for all types of safety, and especially with firearms, explosives, and all of the materials that need to break down, break away and spread out, as much as for those materials and builds that need to keep their structural strength, keeping support structures sound and safe for the actors and the film crew alike.

And don't expect the national safety board, OSHA, to do any real investigations into the matter, or for them to levy any impactful monetary fine on the industry, the production, or the individual responsible parties. Look at what they, in collusion with weak unions, whorish government officials and their paymaster pharmaceutical masters, have done to worker safety and health in the last 22 months!

The issue of a camera crew leaving just before the shooting is the long journey of crews not being protected by the union. It has only gotten worse in NM. Long periods between pay checks and none of the promised nearby housing that keeps a crew safe from falling asleep at the wheel after pulling 12, 14 and even 16 hour days, with the added danger of having to drive an hour or two each way to set. Those conditions are asking for accidents to happen, on and off set.

Also, I saw a national news idiot, I mean "reporter", say that it looked safe on the site today, noting that all on set were wearing masks. WTF that has to do with on set safety only a schooled idiot could see.

I see those masks as quite the opposite of safety and the health of a crew, since I still know how to read. I was refused a film because I insisted that my crew not be subjected to the unhealthy mandate of wearing masks or having some foreign substance put up their noses twice a week....for absolutely nothing but a proof of subservience, certainly not health or science in either case.

My suggestion to that idiot reporter is that he read those regulations borne from all of the decades of OSHA safety data, combined with millions of worker experiences, warning about the excess use of masks and the resultant lack of oxygen, the hypoxic deficit that affects both health and safety, as well as the guaranteed upper respiratory illness acquired by rebreathing in mycotoxins and CO2.

My good friends and I predicted this breakdown of the illusion of union giving a F''k, but that will have no worth if it is not rebuilt with integrity at it's core. I know, "it's new mexico". Still, no excuses.

The whole thing is about spin, but the truth is easy to see when you stand still, look and listen.

My almost 2 year long journey of never ending volunteering, paying my way in gratitude will soon end. I have even reached out to the real Christians, and yes I can accurately say that, to those who haven't followed tyranny and who would be happy to work with a coordinator, but I'm not waiting for them either.

[Gracy]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w8-4XttrzgI
And regarding responsibility, which seems to rest with quite a few people, a super-strong (and utterly obvious!) point was made here. But I've not heard it mentioned by anyone else.
“If you’re capable of memorizing 120 pages of dialogue, you can memorize four lines of gun safety,” special effects and firearms expert Steve Wolf told The New York Post. (https://nypost.com/2021/10/25/no-denying-alec-baldwins-role-in-shooting-mishap-tragedy/)
“If that scene required Baldwin to put the gun to his head and pull the trigger, I’m sure he would have taken a look inside the gun.”
Say no more. That's checkmate.

I'm no gun veteran, but I can absolutely understand and appreciate the four lines of gun safety. They're a common-sense mantra. You don't mess with that. As the Green Beret said in the video above, you thoroughly check a gun that's been handed to you even if you're standing next to the guy who DID hand it to you and watched him check it himself moments earlier. You just do it again.

At first I drifted past this story, but then caught up with it in detail once I started to hear more about the giant clusterf*ck that had somehow happened. It's about guns, for sure, but the higher-level issues are about safety protocols, knowledge, training, and following all that with zero compromise.

I thoroughly agree with everything you say in that post Bill, and was waiting for you to weigh in with your own personal experience in basic safety protocols and situational awareness in mountaineering, as across all fields of risky endeavors they all originate from the same family tree.

As mentioned earlier, I already will now always harbor disdain for Alec Baldwin's obvious and utter lack of regard for any and all basic gun safety protocols (in the same way as I feel about Noam Chomsky's recent despicable comments), but still I'm not comfortable with so much attention being piled onto someone who in the end is just an actor, and not so much on those whose job it was to actually be responsibility for gun safety on the set.

That's where my sights are set anyway (pardon the pun with different spelling).

I'm speculating that much of this may be not just because he's a "Hollyweird" actor, but much more so one whose politics and positions on gun rights in America are at complete odds with much of this forum. Including my own!

But justice is supposed to be blind, and I just can't help but see that there are bigger fish to fry here than the low man on that particular totem pole. I think he's also being judged on gun safety rules on the street, as opposed to those on a movie set.

This sorted story runs much deepen than an actor, and thanks to member Hym for keeping us so much better informed from the inside. :nod:

[TargeT]

I think he's also being judged on gun safety rules on the street, as opposed to those on a movie set.

there's no such thing as situational safety rules.

But I agree, this wasn't just Alec, though he certainly was a part of the equation.

[Gracy]

I think he's also being judged on gun safety rules on the street, as opposed to those on a movie set.

there's no such thing as situational safety rules.

Yes, you are quite correct TargeT, thank you for pointing out something I neglected to clarify. As a conceal carry person I'm well aware that you are 100% correct!

I only meant the difference to be in degree of culpability in case of an accident. On the street Alec Baldwin is f##ked. On a movie set? From my layman's perspective I see it as a completely different situation, regardless of his demonstrated complete and utter incompetence in something he should have already had down pat a long time ago.

[iota]

I think he's also being judged on gun safety rules on the street, as opposed to those on a movie set.

there's no such thing as situational safety rules.

Yes, you are quite correct TargeT, thank you for pointing out something I neglected to clarify. As a conceal carry person I'm well aware that you are 100% correct!

I only meant the difference to be in degree of culpability in case of an accident. On the street Alec Baldwin is f##ked. On a movie set? From my layman's perspective I see it as a completely different situation, regardless of his demonstrated complete and utter incompetence in something he should have already had down pat a long time ago.

the issue is NOT "degree of culpability"

just as there are NO 'degrees of being dead"

you are either responsible for the death of someone?

or you are NOT

and the person is either dead? or alive

you are speaking of mitigating factors like his experience or lack thereof

THE WHY of it? (he's arrogant? he's careless? he has a warped sense of humor? that' just how he rolls?)

ANY of those reasons are just the scenery .. as in Italy instead of France fleshing out the HOW to paint a larger picture

NONE of which in ANY way absolve or remove even ONE "degree of culpability"

they may now ADD to that by factoring in his complete absence of responsibility for the choices he has made

in lieu of the fact of the CHOICES that WERE available for him to make

but CHOSE not to... NOW .. as way of answering

WTH? or WHY????? enter in ALL the "becauses"

because he was an ego maniacal arrogant individual, UNaccustomed to being held accountable for his choices?

because he CHOSE to take someone's word for the condition of a lethal weapon, which MEANS - he CHOSE to be IRRESPONSIBLE

being IRRESPONSIBLE for whatever reason? WAS a CHOICE he freely made

being an ADULT, of sound mind, with FULL knowlege that what he held in his hand was no toy, but a weapon?

and making the CHOICE to aim it and pull the trigger?

RESULTED in the death of a young mother and her son will grow up without her

explain to him "degree of culpability"

because i'm pretty sure for her son? the question would boil down to:

"Did he kill my mother or not?"


:(

[iota]

to make things just CRYSTAL clear?

Alec Baldwin is the ONLY person who killed Halyna

he is THE ONE and ONLY person who did that

NO ONE else actually killed her

OTHERS? may hold RESPONSIBILITY for THEIR choices that CONTRIBUTED to the CONDITION of

the weapon that Alec Baldwin chose to point at Halyna, pull the trigger and kill her

but NO ONE else actually killed her

[TargeT]

the weapon that Alec Baldwin chose to point at Halyna, pull the trigger and kill her


TBH, he pointed it at the camera, to practice a scene, she was standing there... (honestly... not quite sure why, but it's not her fault at all; what happened to all the "shielding" we were told about by witnesses??)....

this was negligent homicide, but almost a "coalition" of negligence really... there is a very strict system in place that was ignored by multiple people..... that shouldn't be ignored either.

[iota]

the weapon that Alec Baldwin chose to point at Halyna, pull the trigger and kill her


TBH, he pointed it at the camera, to practice a scene, she was standing there... (honestly... not quite sure why, but it's not her fault at all; what happened to all the "shielding" we were told about by witnesses??)....

this was negligent homicide, but almost a "coalition" of negligence really... there is a very strict system in place that was ignored by multiple people..... that shouldn't be ignored either.


https://media.townhall.com/townhall/reu/o/2018/306/ec68c03e-4444-4fa2-a949-6ebf3a63fbd9-860x475.jpg

"coalition of negligence"! cool phrase! and perfect description!



that coalition included Hannah Gutierrez (https://uproxx.com/movies/nicolas-cage-rust-armorer-prop-master-hannah-gutierrez-reed-the-old-way-halyna-hutchins-alec-baldwin/) and David Hulls (https://abcnews.go.com/Entertainment/wireStory/crew-member-baldwin-careful-guns-fatal-shooting-80765004)


NEITHER were good choices for someone careful or responsible


His crew was upset enough to WALK OUT (https://www.msn.com/en-us/movies/news/alec-baldwin-rust-camera-crew-walked-off-the-set-in-protest-before-the-fatal-shooting/ar-AAPQj5V)


CHOOSING to disregard the concerns of the crew was irresponsible


FAILURE to resolve their complaints (https://chicago.suntimes.com/2021/10/23/22741959/alec-baldwin-shooting-rust-movie-gun-911-call-new-mexico-cinematographer-halyna-hutchins-killed) even worse (created possibility of retaliation)


"There should have been an investigation into what happened," said the crew member. "There were no safety meetings. There was no assurance that it wouldn't happen again. All they wanted to do was rush, rush, rush."

A colleague was so alarmed by the prop gun misfires he sent a text message to the unit production manager. "We've now had 3 accidental discharges. This is super unsafe," according to a copy of the message reviewed by the Times."


AND at least ONE story has the weapons being left out while the whole crew left


ALL of this? WAS KNOWN to him and he CHOSE to disregard it


the crew had used the gun with live bullets for target practice (https://nypost.com/2021/10/26/rust-crew-used-alec-baldwins-prop-gun-for-plinking/)


REAL bullets AND blanks were on the set





47782


so ... looks like there were many cooks in the kitchen

EACH contributing an INGREDIENT to the recipe

but they are NO more than INGREDIENTS in HIS Soup


EACH person is 100% responsible for THEIR part as an "ingredient" to this recipe

and ALL deserve to be held accountable for EVERY negligent choice

INDISPUTABLY


https://nypost.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2021/10/rust-cast-1.jpg?quality=90&strip=all&w=618&h=410&crop=1


but NONE of this changes the fact that:


Alec Baldwin is the ONE and ONLY person who killed Halyna Hutchins


NO ONE else actually killed her



:sherlock:

but still? i feel for the man ... pretty harsh way to learn a lesson ..

and i also have compassion because i think all of us have had OUR version of being faced with the reality of our choices in a way that could neither be denied nor ignored any longer

i know i have ..

i already sent some grace his way, the main one on my heart though, is the son

:flower:

[Tyy1907]

Some of my thoughts
-she was targetted for a reason
-this was planned for few years now, going by Baldwin eluding to shooting people on social media
-removal of real guns from movie sets means further steps in gun control
- Baldwins questionable social media posts combined with all the other excuses (switched armorer, low budget movie etc) will suffice in preventing further inquiry.
- sophisticated mind control used on Baldwin to put out the questionable social media posts as well as doing the act. Hitting her in the kill zone in one shot. Then the control was lifted and he was left to the horror of the situation. He could be a victim in this.

[iota]

here is the info i was going to post earlier


Do we know the make and model of the gun ?
If it were a Colt SAA ( single action army revolver ) they have to be cocked (4 clicks) before discharging.

The only exception really is when holstered- hence a "cowboy" load - only 5 bullets in the gun. The hammer then rests on an empty chamber when holstered. This was to ensure that whilst working that if by accident the hammer is accidentally hit it is not resting on a live round shooting the owner in the foot. Very hard for this type of weapon to misfire.



this is the type of gun used:



https://i1.wp.com/northmacedonia.it/wp-content/uploads/2021/10/Gun-that-went-off-in-Alec-Baldwins-hands-and-killed.jpg?w=634&ssl=1



(The gun pictured above is a classic Colt pistol manufactured between 1873-92.
Whereas the precise mannequin of the gun used is unknown, Rust is about within the 1880's)


but here's the kicker (i wasl like dying to say "smoking gun"! ) :sun:


Gun that went off in Alec Baldwin’s palms and killed
Halyna Hutchins ‘was used for goal observe’


ok BEFORE i cover the story?

i just re-read that headline. they used very specific wording that painted a specific picture, one that 100% absolved Baldwin of responsibility ~ THAT, of course, is “Spin”

"went off"

implies ZERO culpability, as if the gun is mischievous and has a mind of its own. when in actuality he

he was screwing around, I’ve read 2 reports he was waving it around before pointed it and fired.

The gun? Did not shoot itself …

North Macedonia reports:

"The gun that killed the cinematographer on the set of Alec Baldwin’s Rust had been used for goal observe by crew members, sources linked to the western movie’s manufacturing stated.

A number of sources related to the set of Rust informed TMZ that the identical Colt pistol that went off in Alec Baldwin’s palms, killing Halyna Hutchins and injuring director Joel Souza, had been used recreationally by crew members.

The sources declare that some crew members would go off for goal observe utilizing actual bullets, and a few consider a dwell spherical from these observe classes discovered its means onto the set.

One other supply informed TMZ that dwell ammo and blanks had been being saved in the identical space on set, providing one other doable rationalization as to how a bullet was fired from Baldwin’s Colt.

Alec Baldwin was wielding a classic Colt pistol when it by accident went off. It isn’t recognized who loaded the weapon and why it went off as a alternative crew was introduced within the day of the incident (The gun pictured above is a classic Colt pistol manufactured between 1873-92. Whereas the precise mannequin of the gun used is unknown, Rust is about within the Eighteen Eighties)"


https://i.postimg.cc/Fz2jHd5q/Alec-Hannah.png/


source: https://northmacedonia.it/2021/10/24/gun-that-went-off-in-alec-baldwins-palms-and-killed-halyna-hutchins-was-used-for-goal-observe/

A commenter Putting the pieces Together:


- There were three "prop" guns laid out on a table on the set by armorer Hannah Gutierrez Reed.

- 1st Assistant Director Dave Halls picked up one of these guns and yelled "Cold gun on set!" before handing it to Alec Baldwin.

- The cast and crew broke for lunch a short time thereafter. From what I gather, the weapon was left on set while everyone went off to get a bite to eat.

- When the accident happened, the director, cinematographer, and actor were discussing the scene when he drew the weapon, asked: "Is this what you want?" before pulling the trigger.

- The gun fired, hit the DP in the chest, and hit the director in the shoulder.


another commenter wrote:


You don't just grab a gun start waving it around pointing it at people then pull the trigger at someone.

Sht beyond stupid. I don't even think they were filming? Probably rehearsing or some sht. But again don't matter. Play stupid games win stupid prizes.


and


He does raise a good point, that a gun should NEVER be pointed in any direction other than one in which it can be fired.

And that applies whether it’s unloaded, safety on, loaded with blanks, disassembled or anything else.

Because the fact is: the fact is:


If you don’t point a gun at another human, it won’t kill them.

so pretty much ALL the "details"? all the "reasons" pretty much will only serve to explain

WHY and HOW Alec Baldwin killed Halyma Hutchins

NOT whether or not he was the one that killed her

but, without a doubt? there were tons of "ingredients" in that soup, as T. said there was a "coalition" of negligence

i'm pretty sure there are a LOT of details that will be "outed" as finger start pointing and people scurry to absolve themselves of the responsibility of their choices which appear to be negligent

so there are tons of details to dig up as to HOW the conditions set up

that led to a live bullet being in the gun Alec used to kill Halyma

but i think i'll leave that to you guys to uncover them

:sherlock:

[Bill Ryan]

Some of my thoughts
-she was targetted for a reason
-this was planned for few years now, going by Baldwin eluding to shooting people on social media
-removal of real guns from movie sets means further steps in gun control
- Baldwins questionable social media posts combined with all the other excuses (switched armorer, low budget movie etc) will suffice in preventing further inquiry.
- sophisticated mind control used on Baldwin to put out the questionable social media posts as well as doing the act. Hitting her in the kill zone in one shot. Then the control was lifted and he was left to the horror of the situation. He could be a victim in this.Nonsense. :)

Here's what I bet happened. (Any takers?)


The armorer, Hannah Gutierrez-Reed, has told the police that she checked the three guns on the trolley before the break for lunch. She said they were all empty. (One was a plastic gun, anyway.)
Somehow, a live round found its way into the gun that the Assistant Director Dave Halls "grabbed" and gave to Baldwin — after the lunch break.
My strong guess is that the gun was used for playtime target practice during the lunch break. (Lunch itself, with Baldwin, Souza, Hutchins, and other senior members of the crew, may have been quite some distance away and well out of sight or earshot.)
So the real negligence may lie with one of more of those unnamed crew members. It'd bet the police are investigating that. And someone, somewhere, may be lying or covering up.
I'd be sure that Hannah Gutierrez-Reed is (a) distraught and (b) telling the truth. An experienced armorer would have (a) locked up the guns over lunch and (b) rechecked them again after, as has to be routine. But she never did either of those. That's negligence, for sure, but not criminal negligence.

I'm no lawyer, but it seems reasonable to suggest that if the producers (including Baldwin) knew that target practice with live rounds had been occurring several times during breaks, and no action was taken, then that's where much of the liability lies.

[Did You See Them]

I go with what your saying Bill .. but at the end of the day the ultimate responsibility lies with the person last to pickup/hold/use the gun and how well they check it.
A Colt 45 SAA has to be loaded one bullet at a time and to check you need to empty the chambers one by one to see what's been loaded before loading again one at a time. Baldwin has NEVER checked that gun.
He took a life needlessly.

[Gracy]

Here's what I bet happened. (Any takers?)


The armorer, Hannah Gutierrez-Reed, has told the police that she checked the three guns on the trolley before the break for lunch. She said they were all empty. (One was a plastic gun, anyway.)
Somehow, a live round found its way into the gun that the Assistant Director Dave Halls "grabbed" and gave to Baldwin — after the lunch break.
My strong guess is that the gun was used for playtime target practice during the lunch break. (Lunch itself, with Baldwin, Souza, Hutchins, and other senior members of the crew, may have been quite some distance away and well out of sight or earshot.)
So the real negligence may lie with one of more of those unnamed crew members. It'd bet the police are investigating that. And someone, somewhere, may be lying or covering up.
I'd be sure that Hannah Gutierrez-Reed is (a) distraught and (b) telling the truth. An experienced armorer would have (a) locked up the guns over lunch and (b) rechecked them again after, as has to be routine. But she never did either of those. That's negligence, for sure, but not criminal negligence.


That's as plausible of a scenario as any. From the sound of it so far, things were run pretty fast and loose around there, so yeah, I can see something stupid like that happening quite easily under those circumstances.

I'd be curious what Satori's opinion would be concerning negligence vs. criminal negligence. In the mean time though I went on a quick perusal of the legal difference between the two terms. Of course this would come down to New Mexico state law, and there wasn't much to be found there online, but this link below seemed to offer the clearest description of waters that can be very murky.

Looks like it's actually "civil negligence" vs. "criminal negligence".
https://www.jdsupra.com/legalnews/what-s-the-difference-between-99498/

After reading all that, I'm sticking with criminal negligence in the case of the armorer, Hannah Gutierrez-Reed. As the "expert", she should have known better on multiple fronts. She only had one job on that set, and the following are two of the examples listed as criminal negligence:


Leaving your child in your car unattended in hot weather.


a parent or guardian leaving a loaded firearm where a small child can get it.

And a child did get to that gun...


I'm no lawyer, but it seems reasonable to suggest that if the producers (including Baldwin) knew that target practice with live rounds had been occurring several times during breaks, and no action was taken, then that's where much of the liability lies.

I still see it that the armorer is ultimately responsible if that were the case, those guns were her baby to protect. But yes, if this was indeed happening, here's how I would rank them from most responsible, to least responsible:

1) The armorer

2) The producers

3) The actor

All three could be charged so far as I'm concerned

[Bill Ryan]

Here's what I bet happened. (Any takers?)

[ ..... ]

Looks like I was wrong. It's a mystery close to the core of all this. This is from numerous websites. (Here's just one (https://kgmi.com/news/030030-how-live-ammo-got-on-set-still-a-mystery-in-baldwin-shooting/))

At 24, Gutierrez Reed had little experience working as an armorer. She told detectives that on the morning of the shooting, she checked the dummy bullets — bullets that appear real, save for a small hole in the side of the casing that identifies them as inoperable — to ensure none were “hot,” according to a search warrant affidavit made public Wednesday.
When the crew broke for lunch, the guns used for filming were locked in a safe inside a large white truck where props were kept, Gutierrez Reed said. The ammunition, however, was left unsecured on a cart. There was additional ammo inside the prop truck.
After lunch, the film’s prop master, Sarah Zachry, removed the guns from the safe and handed them to Gutierrez Reed, Gutierrez Reed told investigators.
According to a search warrant affidavit released last Friday, Gutierrez Reed set three guns on a cart outside the church, and assistant director Dave Halls took one from the cart and handed it to Baldwin. The document released Wednesday said the armorer sometimes handed the gun to Baldwin, and sometimes to Halls.
Gutierrez Reed declined to comment when contacted by The Associated Press on Wednesday. She wrote in a text message Monday that she was trying to find a lawyer.
My personal comment. I feel sorry for Hannah Gutierrez-Reed. She's a naive sweetie-pie who did her best, is clearly a nice person, and was in over her young head. I do hope she finds a good lawyer. While she accepted the job (as any Hollywood debutante would), she should maybe never have been offered it. ('Rust', and/or Baldwin, cost-and-corner-cutting again.)

[Ratszinger]

It's getting juicy now because it appears Halyna was doing a documentary on the predator child trafficking going on among stars and some say this was no accident that Alec was one of the names on the list that would come out in the film, others are saying he was leveraged to, 'remove her' and this was how it was planned for plausible deniability! There is that word again! I just read another article saying that they do not know Alec's current wearabouts when he was told not to leave the area! Not sure how true but right after an article popped as I was typing apparently showing Alec with his family in NY but I don't know if it is old or if he took off to there. Getting quite interesting because some of the people close to Halyna are convinced she was murdered to stop the film on sex predators in Hollywood!

[Mark (Star Mariner)]

So the real negligence may lie with one of more of those unnamed crew members. It'd bet the police are investigating that. And someone, somewhere, may be lying or covering up

I'd be sure that Hannah Gutierrez-Reed is (a) distraught and (b) telling the truth. An experienced armorer would have (a) locked up the guns over lunch and (b) rechecked them again after, as has to be routine. But she never did either of those. That's negligence, for sure, but not criminal negligence.


If it's proven this really was an accident, one brought about by pure (and quite stunning) negligence, I believe it should be classified as criminal negligence, and very much so. She failed in her duty of care - her chief responsibility. It resulted in loss of life. Someone needs to be accountable for that.

Even if multiple people handled that gun by using it for target practice during lunch hour, the onus must still fall on her. She's the armourer, the weapons-master. It's surely her responsibility to ensure all guns in her custody are not misused, are always accounted for and always made safe. etc. Then again I'm no lawyer either, and no industry expert. Just speaking from what I think is basic common sense.

That a real gun, containing live ammunition, found its way onto a trolley meant for props still somewhat stretches the "negligence" defence. I highly doubt Baldwin knowingly shot Hutchins, that makes no sense. But for me the possibility remains (however unlikely) that Baldwin may have been set up here.

[Satori]

Here's what I bet happened. (Any takers?)


The armorer, Hannah Gutierrez-Reed, has told the police that she checked the three guns on the trolley before the break for lunch. She said they were all empty. (One was a plastic gun, anyway.)
Somehow, a live round found its way into the gun that the Assistant Director Dave Halls "grabbed" and gave to Baldwin — after the lunch break.
My strong guess is that the gun was used for playtime target practice during the lunch break. (Lunch itself, with Baldwin, Souza, Hutchins, and other senior members of the crew, may have been quite some distance away and well out of sight or earshot.)
So the real negligence may lie with one of more of those unnamed crew members. It'd bet the police are investigating that. And someone, somewhere, may be lying or covering up.
I'd be sure that Hannah Gutierrez-Reed is (a) distraught and (b) telling the truth. An experienced armorer would have (a) locked up the guns over lunch and (b) rechecked them again after, as has to be routine. But she never did either of those. That's negligence, for sure, but not criminal negligence.


That's as plausible of a scenario as any. From the sound of it so far, things were run pretty fast and loose around there, so yeah, I can see something stupid like that happening quite easily under those circumstances.

I'd be curious what Satori's opinion would be concerning negligence vs. criminal negligence. In the mean time though I went on a quick perusal of the legal difference between the two terms. Of course this would come down to New Mexico state law, and there wasn't much to be found there online, but this link below seemed to offer the clearest description of waters that can be very murky.

Looks like it's actually "civil negligence" vs. "criminal negligence".
https://www.jdsupra.com/legalnews/what-s-the-difference-between-99498/

After reading all that, I'm sticking with criminal negligence in the case of the armorer, Hannah Gutierrez-Reed. As the "expert", she should have known better on multiple fronts. She only had one job on that set, and the following are two of the examples listed as criminal negligence:


Leaving your child in your car unattended in hot weather.


a parent or guardian leaving a loaded firearm where a small child can get it.

And a child did get to that gun...


I'm no lawyer, but it seems reasonable to suggest that if the producers (including Baldwin) knew that target practice with live rounds had been occurring several times during breaks, and no action was taken, then that's where much of the liability lies.

I still see it that the armorer is ultimately responsible if that were the case, those guns were her baby to protect. But yes, if this was indeed happening, here's how I would rank them from most responsible, to least responsible:

1) The armorer

2) The producers

3) The actor

All three could be charged so far as I'm concerned

The definitions and examples set forth in the link Gracy provided is a good general presentation of the distinction between civil and criminal negligence. The law in this area is fairly uniform in every state.

As I mentioned before in earlier posts on this thread, criminal charges, or not, will come down to the application of the facts, as determined by the law enforcement investigators. These facts are presented to the prosecutor, who ultimately determines whether, in her judgment, a crime was committed and whether there is enough evidence to prove to a jury beyond a reasonable doubt that a crime was committed. The DA has a fair amount of discretion to prosecute or not and to decide who to prosecute or not. However, due to the high profile nature of this case, the DA is undoubtedly getting pressure from many quarters which are affecting her discretion and decision-making.

Civil liability for negligence is a given here. No need to discuss that further. Damages will be paid to her estate and survivors. (As well as to the man who was injured.) The question is whether there is criminal responsibility and if so, who is criminally liable... . There may be more than one person.

My guess is the DA will select a “target”, which is the term they use and not intended to be disrespectful, and present the findings to a grand jury and seek an indictment. As they say, a DA can get a grand jury to indict a ham sandwich. So that’s a pretty low bar to jump over to get an indictment. The other option is a criminal complaint which is presented to a judge. I doubt the DA will go that route.

I wonder what type of criminal charges, if any, the DA is considering. Of potential interest to me is the felony murder rule. Essentially, under that rule if a person dies while a felony is being committed, the felon(s) can be charged with murder regardless of intent and regardless of the actual mechanism causing the death. I’m not suggesting that rule applies under the facts, but I’ve got my eye on that possibility.

I think at the end of the day what may stick, if there are any criminal charges, is involuntary manslaughter.

For what it’s worth.

[Ratszinger]

So the real negligence may lie with one of more of those unnamed crew members. It'd bet the police are investigating that. And someone, somewhere, may be lying or covering up

I'd be sure that Hannah Gutierrez-Reed is (a) distraught and (b) telling the truth. An experienced armorer would have (a) locked up the guns over lunch and (b) rechecked them again after, as has to be routine. But she never did either of those. That's negligence, for sure, but not criminal negligence.


If it's proven this really was an accident, one brought about by pure (and quite stunning) negligence, I believe it should be classified as criminal negligence, and very much so. She failed in her duty of care - her chief responsibility. It resulted in loss of life. Someone needs to be accountable for that.

Even if multiple people handled that gun by using it for target practice during lunch hour, the onus must still fall on her. She's the armourer, the weapons-master. It's surely her responsibility to ensure all guns in her custody are not misused, are always accounted for and always made safe. etc. Then again I'm no lawyer either, and no industry expert. Just speaking from what I think is basic common sense.

That a real gun, containing live ammunition, found its way onto a trolley meant for props still somewhat stretches the "negligence" defence. I highly doubt Baldwin knowingly shot Hutchins, that makes no sense. But for me the possibility remains (however unlikely) that Baldwin may have been set up here.

Gun safety starts with hand holding the weapon! Baldwin's father was a riflery instructor so he certainly knows enough about safety to have been brought up on proper handling! He being an exec in the show is also responsible for being one of the 'safety checkers' himself and being that it was his finger pulling the trigger and mishandling the gun pointing it at people he shares responsiblity here! If it is found that he was indeed being investigated for his bad deviant behavior in his private life he also has motive so it's too early to know. The new article on Trump is quite remarkable if true. Trump has hired his own investigators to look into this because of the pedophile film Halyna was working on. Now Baldwin has been spotted with family in New England! Looks like he is on the move.

https://nypost.com/2021/10/28/alec-baldwin-spotted-with-family-in-new-england-town/?utm_source=browser&utm_medium=push-notification&utm_campaign=alec-baldwin-spotted-with-family-in-new-england-town

Trump opens investigation of his own (https://realrawnews.com/2021/10/trump-opens-investigation-into-baldwin-shooting/)

[Tyy1907]

It's getting juicy now because it appears Halyna was doing a documentary on the predator child trafficking going on among stars and some say this was no accident that Alec was one of the names on the list that would come out in the film, others are saying he was leveraged to, 'remove her' and this was how it was planned for plausible deniability! There is that word again! I just read another article saying that they do not know Alec's current wearabouts when he was told not to leave the area! Not sure how true but right after an article popped as I was typing apparently showing Alec with his family in NY but I don't know if it is old or if he took off to there. Getting quite interesting because some of the people close to Halyna are convinced she was murdered to stop the film on sex predators in Hollywood!

If she was working on a film like this then it's a no brainer in my opinion.

[Mark (Star Mariner)]

The new article on Trump is quite remarkable if true. Trump has hired his own investigators to look into this because of the pedophile film Halyna was working on.

Definitely Baldwin is in part culpable, but I don't know how you can prove intent. What's he doing in Vermont? Is it normal that a 'suspect' is allowed to leave the state? I didn't think it was.

I have 'heard' since day one the rumour that Halyna was soon to work on a paedophile documentary, but have yet to see definitive evidence of it. It's just a rumour as far as I'm aware, but would happily be corrected. If she was a target, why her though, a cinematographer? Why not the producer, the director, the whistleblowers involved, or those funding the project etc?

[Bill Ryan]

I mentioned earlier that I'm barely entitled to comment on gun safety issues (and protocols) on movie sets, but I can totally understand all the safety logic from my own experience as a mountaineer.

So here's a thought experiment.

I'm on a film crew as a mountaineering safety specialist, and the lead actor is Tom Cruise.

Tom Cruise is the kind of guy who'd always want to do a stunt himself. This scene involves rock climbing, and so I'm the guy who provides, fastens and secures his climbing harness, ties the climbing rope into it (which needs to be done with a particular knot that all climbers know), and maybe there are other safety issues such as screwing closed the karabiners (metal connecting snaplinks) and such things like that.

But here's the rider. Tom Cruise is an experienced climber himself. He's perfectly capable of securing his own harness and tying his own knots. But the protocol on set is that I do it for him.

If I screw up, and Tom Cruise has an accident, is it my sole liability? It'd be argued not — as Tom Cruise had all the personal experience to check everything I was doing, which was right next to him. And it was in his interests to do so.

If I was doing the same thing for someone who'd never worn a climbing harness before, and had no clue how to tie climbing knots, then it'd ALL be on me. It's an entirely different situation.

So that's the analogy. With Alec Baldwin, sure he was handed, and accepted, the 'cold gun' which wasn't. But he's been in the movie industry for decades, including on MANY productions in which he handled weapons as an actor. Even if he's not in the NRA, he's hardly some naive, green gun novice.

So, like Tom Cruise in a climbing scene, Baldwin knows what the heck he's doing, or should be doing, in a gun scene. But he never checked a thing.

[Satori]

The new article on Trump is quite remarkable if true. Trump has hired his own investigators to look into this because of the pedophile film Halyna was working on.

Definitely Baldwin is in part culpable, but I don't know how you can prove intent. What's he doing in Vermont? Is it normal that a 'suspect' is allowed to leave the state? I didn't think it was.

I have 'heard' since day one the rumour that Halyna was soon to work on a paedophile documentary, but have yet to see definitive evidence of it. It's just a rumour as far as I'm aware, but would happily be corrected. If she was a target, why her though, a cinematographer? Why not the producer, the director, the whistleblowers involved, or those funding the project etc?

Intent is only relevant if intent, or scienter in legal terms, is an element of the crime. For example, premediated first degree murder does require intent, intent to kill. Planning, motive, opportunity..., is evidence of such intent.

But other types of homicide (which in the strictest sense is the killing of a human being by another human being--regardless of intent), such as manslaughter, do not require intent. The act itself, actus reus (the what), and not intent (the why), is sufficient in some cases for criminal liability.

[iota]

sorry haven't read ALL comments yet,. but just a quick point:

you know ... none of this confusion would exist in the absence of "spin"

which then translates into HOW it will be "handled"

aside from "spin"? it is VERY cut and dry

if a man is driving drunk? he kills a child, a man, a woman

he IS GUILTY of vehicular manslaughter

no one is even TRYING to "spin" it ANY other way

if someone KILLS anyone? even if they ARE drunk? (and didn't mean to)

since the person is dead? they are guilty of having killed someone

WHY? HOW? or REASONS? don't change this

sure there are details to flesh out how live bullets ended up being in the gun he used to point

where a NOT invisible woman was standing and kill her?

but the fact is he killed her > she is no longer alive

and NONE of the details that will be "discovered"?

will have ANYONE else holding him down, raising his arm, FORCING him to point and shoot

am i right?

:shielddeflect:



ps ... here it is right here



Intent is only relevant if intent, or scienter in legal terms, is an element of the crime. For example, premeditated first degree murder does require intent, intent to kill. Planning, motive, opportunity..., is evidence of such intent.

But other types of homicide

(which in the strictest sense is the killing of a human being by another human being--regardless of intent),

such as manslaughter, do not require intent. The act itself, actus reus (the what), and not intent (the why), is sufficient in some cases for criminal liability.

yes ... this was what i was thinking!

ty Satori

[iota]

filler post for story i might share on .. umm .. this issue


so ....

my guilty pleasure is watching really short vids from this channel while i eat

this one was pretty interesting

short clip on ALec Baldwin




e2lpYG0LjxA

@2:30 it talks about his break with brother Stephen over Trump! didn't know that, impressive

[Bubu]

I dont think this is an accident. also works well as a diversion. Someone please look somewhere. There is a good chance that something important that needs cover is at play. I'm guessing.

[Mark (Star Mariner)]

If I screw up, and Tom Cruise has an accident, is it my sole liability? It'd be argued not — as Tom Cruise had all the personal experience to check everything I was doing, which was right next to him. And it was in his interests to do so.

The scenario reminds me of an incident on a dry ski-slope years ago. One kid in the group told the instructor he didn't need to be shown what to do, he already knew how to ski as he'd been to Switzerland. Then he had an accident.

The instructor was at fault here not the kid – in my opinion. All the kids were placed under the instructor's care, and he was negligent in providing it. The buck stops with him. In this instance it was a minor, and you could reasonably argue that yes, obviously the instructor is to blame - they're just kids! I'm just saying the premise is the same: professional expertise always outweighs amateur experience (kids or otherwise).

This shooting "accident" occurred – I assume – under expert supervision: Gutierrez-Reed was in charge of the weapons. Absolutely Baldwin is culpable for firing a live round and killing someone. He should never have been so stupid and thoughtless. But the armourer was totally lax by allowing that to happen, even to potentially happen, on HER watch. What other reason is she there for?! She must have the qualifications, the professional credentials, and probably certificates that landed her that position and which justify that position in the first place. Surely those credentials surpass and outweigh the 'say so' of an actor [under her supervision] and the observational experience he claims to have.

If I was in charge of mountaineering safety on a movie set and Tom Cruise said to me, "I'm capable of ensuring my own safety", I would demand a waiver be signed releasing me of any legal obligation whatsoever if something went wrong, and then walk off set. And even then, if said waiver exonerated me from an accident later, I imagine I would bear a tremendous guilt, especially if loss of life resulted. I'd probably want to go back in time and say "No Tom, I don't care how good you are, or what you think you know, this is my job and I AM in charge – you will do what I say." (or maybe it's just me who has control/trust issues!).

[Gracy]

For anyone that has 22 minutes to spare, "Nuance Bro" takes an objective look at the whole matter. He's a very experienced gun owner himself, so that helps.

Highly recommended:
suZl-mEQiTo

As an aside:

The reason for the name "Nuance Bro", is that he prides himself in looking at and questioning things from all possible angles in an objective matter. He likes to go to protests and practice this. For instance he's personally very pro gun, but if he goes say, to an NRA rally, he'll probe how thoroughly people holding signs have actually thought through what their sign is saying, by asking tough questions from an anti gun position. And vice versa if he goes to an anti gun rally, he'll probe sign holders in the same manner from a pro gun perspective, how thoroughly have they really thought through what they're saying.

Like they teach in debate class, learn to argue both sides of any given subject.

That's why I like his channel. He's educated himself on the pros, the cons, and nuances of many issues, yet has no agenda save for educational purposes.

He demonstrates it's disturbingly very common that people on either side of an issue, actually know very little about what they're sign is saying. A lot of people tend to hear a slogan that they're naturally inclined to agree with, it sounds good and they'll proudly put it on their sign and wave it around, but upon questioning they quickly demonstrate how little they know about it beyond slogans and sound bites...

[iota]

the WAY i ended up on a conspiracy site, WAS by a STRONG desire for TRUTH .. .whether it was pretty or not? in agreement or at odds with what i had thought? i i HATE lies, I HATE to be manipulated or deceived

i once made it a part of my DAILY prayer for almost TWO years, 'i just want to know the TRUTH, please don't let me deceived any longer", having been deceived in my earlier stages of faith

so now i simply have a VERY close and intimate relationship with my Source

and a sign of the "enemy" being: "father of lies"

and in his presence? there is always confusion ... things "muddied" and unsettled ..

so TRUTH WAS and will ALWAYS be of UTMOST importance and a deal breaker for me

operating from clarity? i can spot introduction of confusion immediately

i'll listen to anything, but you can be sure at the end? i'll arrive at a DEFINITE conclusion

because things CANNOT be BOTH > wet AND dry

black AND white

DEAD and ALIVE

and i either killed someone? or i didn't

whatever the reasons behind it might be ....

so the PURPOSE of asking questions on BOTH sides was to arrive AT A DEFINITIVE answer

i'll listen to anything, but will always ASK WHY? WHY is this being presented to me?

WHAT is the intention behind bringing it up?

you can be sure at the end? i'll arrive at a DEFINITE conclusion

i LEFT msm BECAUSE they WERE intending to manipulate me, steer me, confuse me

i didn't land here to embrace more of the same


https://quotlr.com/images/quotes/if-you-dont-stand-for-something-you-will-fall-for-anything.png

[Gracy]

i'll listen to anything, but you can be sure at the end? i'll arrive at a DEFINITE conclusion

because things CANNOT be BOTH > wet AND dry

black AND white

DEAD and ALIVE

and i either killed someone? or i didn't

whatever the reasons behind it might be ....

Well, to each their own, but I'm glad juries are instructed otherwise.

What if I accidentally run someone over and kill them, but it can be shown my brake lines had been cut just prior to them walking out in front of my car? It's possible to kill someone, yet not be a killer.

Is this demonstrating much needed nuance?

Asking pertinent questions?

Or muddying the waters?

So back to topic. Alec Baldwin shot and killed someone, true enough, but that doesn't automatically make him a killer.

[iota]

Alec Baldwin shot and killed someone, true enough, but that doesn't automatically make him a killer..

is that a joke? or INTENTIONAL confabulation?

BY DEFINITION > someone who KILLS someone IS a killer

which you KNOW

and

Juries are MOST definitely instructed to discover truth and stick to facts

you are INTENTIONALLY interposing INTENT and the "Conditions" for the ACT itself

WHAT is YOUR intent of that? may i ask?

focusing on the CONDITIONS existing when he took a lethal weapon and pointed it and pulled the trigger resulting in death

no condition changes the fact that if he did not pull the trigger of a lethal weapon?

Halyma Hutchins would be alive ...as in NOT dead

and as an adult? ,he is EXPECTED to exercise caution in the handling of a lethal weapon

this is stated EXPLICITLY in law and DOES take into account > Reckless disregard

AND the consequences of THAT recklessness must ALSO be taken into consideration

i'd be upset enough if he had killed a dog ... but it was a little boy's mother!!

to take YOUR example?

i can spill water on the floor while i'm cleaning ..

but if someone comes along and gives a push to another and they fall?

yea .. i got the floor wet

the pusher CAUSED the fall

i might be responsible for the CONDITIONS

within which the perpetrator committed the ACTUAL act

but the ACTUAL act was committed by the perpetrator alone ~ ALL BY himself

or as you FINALLY admit:




Alec Baldwin shot and killed someone, true enough

PS

not "someone" ...

her name was Halyma Hutchins, a young mother and wife

[Journeyman]

I don't believe any of this.

It's all too 'on the nose'.

[Bill Ryan]

I don't believe any of this.

It's all too 'on the nose'.I'm curious... what's the "any of this" that you don't believe?

[Tyy1907]

Alec Baldwin shot and killed someone, true enough, but that doesn't automatically make him a killer.

is that a joke? or INTENTIONAL confabulation?

BY DEFINITION > someone who KILLS someone IS a killer

which you KNOW

and

Juries are MOST definitely instructed to discover truth and stick to facts

you are INTENTIONALLY interposing INTENT with the actual act

WHAT is YOUR intent of that? may i ask?

to take YOUR example?

i can spill water on the floor while i'm cleaning ..

but if someone comes along and gives a push to another and they fall?

yea .. i got the floor wet

the pusher CAUSED the fall

i might be responsible for the CONDITIONS

within which the perpetrator committed the ACTUAL act

but the ACTUAL act was committed by the perpetrator alone ~ ALL BY himself

or as you FINALLY admit:




Alec Baldwin shot and killed someone, true enough

PS

not "someone" ...

her name was Halyma Hutchins, a young mother and wife

I agree with what you both are saying.

No matter how you slice it he killed Halyna Hutchins. However did he plan and act on a plan to kill her? Or were other players involved?

In terms of karma they would all have a connection to her murder. Whoever planned it (if that's the case) would have a large karmic debt.

On the flip side if it was a number of negligent acts that resulted in her death - with no intent to kill, the karma would be dispersed on all negligent players.

No one can con their way out of karma. It's described as the great leveller. If your actions or lack of actions caused love to be taken away, you will have to put love back in some way. Through sacrifice of some kind or acts of loving kindness etc.

[Journeyman]

I don't believe any of this.

It's all too 'on the nose'.I'm curious... what's the "any of this" that you don't believe?

It's a question that deserves a proper answer Bill and I'll do my best to provide one later. For now, I should say I'm viewing world events through a particular lens, based on the following premises:

There's a war on.
It's primarily fought in the information arena.
Some of the events presented as organic news are scripted and this is one of them.

So I'm already 'out there' I guess in terms of assumptions, however...

I don't buy the account of the shooting, I've been on sets, worked with armourers. They are serious people. As are film producers, every second on a film set money is being burned through. Shots are prepared and rehearsed in advance. The account, the presence of the bullet, it doesn't stack up.

There's a lot more, but I'm on a tablet that's about to give up the ghost. Let me get to a keyboard, likely tomorrow now and I'll try and give a more reasoned backstory to that rather flippant post of mine above.

[Bill Ryan]

[The account, the presence of the bullet, it doesn't stack up.

Yes, there's a bunch of stuff that's super-hard to even try to explain without a bunch more established facts.

One thought that's been poking me internally, and which I can't quite dismiss — even though that, too, seems almost impossible to imagine – is that the young armorer, Hannah Gutierrez-Reed, didn't know the difference between a live round and a dummy.

A dummy, that is, not a blank. Live rounds and dummies are intentionally near-identical in appearance, but a dummy rattles, as it's filled with BB shot rather than gunpowder.

Again, that'd be practically impossible to credit, and no-one anywhere has even mentioned that for a moment as a theoretical explanation. But it would actually fully account for the gross, base-level screw-up. The entire thing would then make sense. Everything else that happened (and there was a lot of it!!) could be regarded as lesser, but still contributory, negligence.

[iota]

I agree with what you both are saying.

No matter how you slice it he killed Halyna Hutchins. However did he plan and act on a plan to kill her? Or were other players involved?

In terms of karma they would all have a connection to her murder. Whoever planned it (if that's the case) would have a large karmic debt.

On the flip side if it was a number of negligent acts that resulted in her death - with no intent to kill, the karma would be dispersed on all negligent players.

No one can con their way out of karma. It's described as the great leveller. If your actions or lack of actions caused love to be taken away, you will have to put love back in some way. Through sacrifice of some kind or acts of loving kindness etc.

thanks TYY .. the topic isn't really karma though, not even his intent of this thread i started

it was moved from Breaking News to here, didn't have a chance to name the thread, and headline of my first post was used instead

the topic of my thread is:

Alec Baldwin killed Halyma Hutchins (with a REAL Gun, NOT prop)

how are the MSM, Directors of the Social Narrative, the enemies of Truth

going to "spin"

the FACT that

Alec Baldwin killed Halyma Hutchins

and they show up ... right on cue

:shielddeflect:

also, since we are on a conspiracy site? to see if any evidence exists (as Journeyman alluded to) whether this holds the possibility of being a psyop?

(boy, i'd REALLY like this young woman and mother to NOT be dead)

or as YOU and SM have suggested, are any connections to trafficking etc?

these MIGHT prove interesting explorations

as CONTRIBUTING FACTORS, fleshing out the scenery

they just cannot THEN be used or substituted for the FACT

that irrespective of ANY conditions or reasons?

UNLESS it is discovered someone held his arm and forced his finger to pull the trigger?

Alec Baldwin alone holds responsibility for his actions and their consequence

in this case? the death of a beautiful young woman

again, i'd have been upset enough had it been a dog he killed!

[Gracy]

UNLESS it is discovered someone held his arm and forced his finger to pull the trigger?

HAD HE NOT DONE THAT? Halyma would be alive today

I'm gonna share something personal here. It's not in defense of the actor as I've already described, and neither do I expect it to altar your opinion that I'm some sort of deep state operative, but I'm going to give it a shot anyway.

Shortly after my dad passed away we were going through his things as family does, and I came across something that must have been a burden he carried with him his whole life, but never told anyone. We did know that back when he was a very young man before he married mom, he drove a truck for a while, but that was all we knew, something he did for a relatively brief time before moving on to other things and settling down into family life.

I forget exactly how the old faded, cut out newspaper clip put it, but it was something along the lines of "Driver not charged in pedestrian fatality". Well the article was from Atlanta, and the two cities he drove in were New Orleans, and Atlanta. And tears come to my eyes (including now) when recounting this, but there in the background of the photo of the scene with police and all, was a young man leaning against a big truck with his head hanging down, who looked an awful like dad at that age.

So long story short. Yes, it does indeed appear that my beloved father did indeed run someone over and kill them, but that doesn't make him a killer if the guy walked out right in front of him.

That's never been my definition of "a killer" anyway. I hope that helps.

One more thing. I would greatly appreciate it if you would stop editing the way I write.

I said it this way:




Alec Baldwin shot and killed someone, true enough, but that doesn't automatically make him a killer.

Not this way:



Alec Baldwin shot and killed someone, true enough, but that doesn't automatically make him a killer.

I don't altar the way you write to suit a point I'm making, please show me the same basic respect. :flower:

[iota]

as to "altering" your posts? i just went back and directly copied and pasted right now just to be sure

bolding ... coloring? ... Gracy those are quite common and accepted practices

i am sorry though about what you went through, i had mentioned this with Alec as well earlier

it might surprise you to know that i understand more clearly than you might imagine .. i too have a story, a couple in fact, that i also hesitated in sharing ..but i will reciprocate since you have in just a bit



**

Gracy whether you are a deep state operative or not? paid or not? becomes inconsequential if you are having the same effect

much like "details" being discussed regarding Alec here

i think what i posted here (https://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?112057-Meme-Your-Memeist-Memes-Thread&p=1460026&viewfull=1#post1460026) expresses my feelings with clarity


(repost)



https://media.gab.com/system/media_attachments/files/088/857/726/original/584d4046331ed96a.jpg


To that last point in mountain_jim's meme, I would add the following to the end:


Including alternative media

and to YOUR point i ALSO would add the following to the end:



conspiracy forum mods who NEVER miss an opportunity to criticize our movement,

through subtle and NOT so subtle jabs at all things conspiracy related

Continuously undermining our interests

Yet? is SO DEDICATED and committed to always present the "other side" to us

Incessantly without Fail ~~ if we could just get you to do THAT for us ....

Have they thanked your dedication yet?


can you please post where you have made sure to stick up for us instead of them?

i have never seen one

:confused:

ps wouldn't trouble you but since you're a mod on a conspiracy site?

one would think YOUR posts? would demonstrate a CLEAR bias towards US

or even just slightly supportive in loads of posts .... or at least some of them ...

how about a crumb or two maybe?

but i haven't come across a SINGLE one ..

:sherlock:

i would thank you for being SO COMMITTED in presenting THEIR perspective ...

except MY sympathies, support and loyalty? are for THIS side ...

so .... :thumbsdown::thumbsdown::thumbsdown:

[Dennis Leahy]

Ahhhhh. This is a field in which I have expertise, as I have been on the set of 3 movies*, as actor, crew, and well sort of a cameo walk-on, so I really do know what I'm talking about here. :bigsmile:

All true, but I'm teasing about having any expertise in gun armory, on-set. One of the movies (my legit movie experience, as a boom man) was a martial arts movie and did have weapons, but I only vaguely remember a gun in one scene and it wasn't fired. I do have gun handling experience. I also have had a loaded .45 aimed at my face by a guy that I had been in his wedding a few weeks earlier, but probably my most relevant experience to this movie set shooting was being with a friend that accidentally shot another friend, and I rode in the back of a station wagon to the hospital with my finger in the bullet hole, to stop the intermittent squirting of blood. That one stuck with me. I am 100% aware of the muzzle direction of a gun. I will never, ever, ever cross over the barrel of a gun across a person's body. I treat the gun as if it is always emitting a laser beam, and that "laser beam" would simply never be allowed to cross over any portion of a person's body nor be in a position where a ricochet could direct the bullet at a person. I am 100% consistent with this, and openly discuss this with the few people I have gone to a gun range with - I absolutely insist that everyone I am with does exactly the same thing, or I won't go.

So, the idea that Baldwin pointed the barrel of a gun toward another person is wrong, and for that, the onus of the bullet is his.

Secondly, I can't imagine why there would be any real bullets on a movie set. As someone mentioned previously, as soon as that executive-level, costly, decision to have live ammo on a movie set would have been made, there is no way that someone could have loaded that gun on set with a real bullet for a scene where the gun was pointed at actors, and there is no way some dumbass actor would have been handed a loaded gun with live rounds. Any scene that needed to have a real bullet fired would be highly, highly controlled, to make sure some dumbass didn't wander into the trajectory.

Whoever brought a live round to the movie set (where there were supposed to be zero live rounds on set) is guilty of negligence, as is true with each step in the process of loading, aiming, and finally firing the bullet.









.








.







.




*(1. as an actor, in a high school film class zombie movie. I was buried and came out of the ground. 2. as a film crew member (boom man) for a TV pilot that didn't get picked up... and I didn't get paid! and 3.) I sort of accidentally walked on to the movie set of Groundhog Day, and spoke with Bill Murray, until the assistant director chased me away. hahahaha)

[Orph]

and to YOUR point i ALSO would add the following to the end:


[SIZE="2"][CENTER]conspiracy forum mods who NEVER miss an opportunity to criticize our movement,

through subtle and NOT so subtle jabs at all things conspiracy related


ps wouldn't trouble you but since you're a mod on a conspiracy site?





Why do you keep calling Project Avalon a "conspiracy site"? Sure there is some conspiracy stuff discussed on this forum, but it's only a very small part of what is discussed here. There is approximately 90 different forum topics discussed here. My opinion only, but that doesn't justify calling P.A. a conspiracy site.

[Gracy]

as to "altering" your posts? i just went back and directly copied and pasted right now just to be sure

bolding ... coloring? ... Gracy those are quite common and accepted practices

No they are not, but they are with you. It's not cool...


Gracy whether you are a deep state operative or not? paid or not? becomes inconsequential if you are having the same effect

That's your opinion, one that you state repeatedly.


can you please post where you have made sure to stick up for us instead of them?

i have never seen one

:confused:

I don't see life in "us vs. them" terms, it goes back to nuance.


i would thank you for being SO COMMITTED in presenting THEIR perspective ...

except MY sympathies, support and loyalty? are for THIS side ...

so .... :thumbsdown::thumbsdown::thumbsdown:

Obviously I've failed in my attempt to maybe find a patch of common ground with you, or express accurately enough that there is such a thing as nuance in this world. If your convinced I'm here for the sole reason of "being SO COMMITTED in presenting THEIR perspective ..." then you are entitled to your opinion.

Bottom line iota: If you wish to engage in polite dialogue with me than fine, I will oblige as with anyone else. Agreement is not necessary but mutual respect is.

Now mod hat on:

The continued stalking and verbal abuse needs to stop.

:focus:

[Tyy1907]

Coworker was telling me today when his son went through police training they had to carry wooden guns. And that when they'd graduated to training holding real guns, they had no ammo in them and the protocols were strict as ever. One guy violated a rule with his unloaded handgun and was immediately dismissed from the program. 6 weeks in done.

Hard to comprehend such negligence. Doesn't add up to me.

And Baldwins tweet in response to this all seemed more like a political statement than a heartfelt response. My .02

[iota]

ok Gracy, i will respond




No they are not, but they are with you. It's not cool...

as you just pointed out? they are a common practice with ME

it is MY style of communication for the purpose of clarity to specify the focus of my response.

it is found in 1400 of my posts you are neither a target nor an exception.


question?

putting a label of "not cool" in reference to my particular style of formatting IS itself, "not cool"

but since you set the example? is it ALSO "ok" to mention that people told you repeatedly that your communication (the actual words) were offensive and have even left because of you

and that it wasn't "cool" for you to NOT CARE and continue?

i'm still kinda new, so don't know if the "mod hat" gives you carte blanche or an exemption?



Gracy whether you are a deep state operative or not? paid or not? becomes inconsequential if you are having the same effect

That's your opinion, one that you state repeatedly.

again, 14000 posts ~ 1392 on topics of interest ~ "repeatedly" would be a complete confabulation on your part. and in view of sheer numbers? that statement is actually FALSE

what i do consistently?

is demonstrate loyalty and support for the ideology i espouse > i assume you have as well

i only communicated the impact you have had on me. > others have communicated your impact on them

almost seemed necessary sinceapparently ALL THEIR communication had not been understood by you

if you DID understand, can you please explain why it was all right to not care?

you have stated you are an empath, CARING is the ONE PRIMARY characteristic OF an "empath' ...

or even of just normal female energy that is nurturing by nature > neither have i felt from you

or are you an anomaly "empath" that CAN "feel" our pain, discomfort with being ridiculed? feeling a tad suppressed? feeling negated? accosted even?

but you just do not care?

indifference or callous disregard for the feelings of others? is the OPPOSITE of an empath .. they are considerate, sensitive VS inconsiderate or insensitive

EVERY time you did that? it occurred as ATTACK? NOT nurturing or caring




In the meantime, I shall continue to post where I please, and say or ask what I please, whether it meets with your approval or not.



i apologize, it seems you have ALREADY made your position on that point QUITE CLEAR

that was to me .. it would take time to find the SAME communication to others



I don't see life in "us vs. them" terms, it goes back to nuance.

SO THEN? WHAT would possibly draw you HERE? WHY are you here then?

THAT HAS been communicated in thousands of posts here

that "they" are NOT our friends

that we ACTIVELY feel oppressed and attacked by them?

they are making lists and targeting us s "domestic terrorist"

HOW are they NOT our enemies? and feeling otherwise? WHAT are you doing here?

in NO WAY, can any of the above? be classified as a:



nuance


Obviously I've failed in my attempt to maybe find a patch of common ground with you,


Failed to FIND ~ "common ground" with me?

i didn't know you were trying

i thought maybe you were just an oppositional person, or thrived on conflict

i can honestly state, your retorts (to me and others) never occurred as an "attempt to find common ground"

your repeated statement of "i don't want to beat a dead horse" as you relentlessly beat it beyond recognition! could NEVER be construed as:


"an attempt to find common ground"

for you to NOT behave that way is such a STARK contrast, in fact? it was suggested as Gracy 2.0!

** PS **

i have made the decision to address your last point in a separate post and NOT here

you must know that it is insurmountably difficult for me to feel something and NOT express it and that i believe everything i have sated here 100% OR i would NOT have stated it

but, out of respect for this forum and its members i would like to return the thread back on the topic of Alec Baldwin and this event

i think Gracy and i have both made our positions CLEAR and i propose that both of us cease from posting here any further

PSS
i've decided that if i DO share any stories? it will not be here

so ...

:focus:

[7alon]

[The account, the presence of the bullet, it doesn't stack up.

Yes, there's a bunch of stuff that's super-hard to even try to explain without a bunch more established facts.

One thought that's been poking me internally, and which I can't quite dismiss — even though that, too, seems almost impossible to imagine – is that the young armorer, Hannah Gutierrez-Reed, didn't know the difference between a live round and a dummy.

A dummy, that is, not a blank. Live rounds and dummies are intentionally near-identical in appearance, but a dummy rattles, as it's filled with BB shot rather than gunpowder.

Again, that'd be practically impossible to credit, and no-one anywhere has even mentioned that for a moment as a theoretical explanation. But it would actually fully account for the gross, base-level screw-up. The entire thing would then make sense. Everything else that happened (and there was a lot of it!!) could be regarded as lesser, but still contributory, negligence.

I have contacts from Hollywood that are adamant about live rounds being impossible to have on set unless the crew approves/wants it. It has been speculated amongst some anons that the whole thing was a sham and it was to get Halyna Hutchins into witness protection (fake hit/fake death). The reason for this theory is purely because her Husband worked for the Clintons via Perkins Coie Law Firm, working alongside Michael Sussman.

I was going to source the info about Hutchins working with Sussman, but articles are being deleted/have been deleted already unfortunately.

Edit - the links do work, it was just all stuck together in a mess of links.

https://www.reuters.com/legal/legalindustry/alec-baldwin-shooting-victim-was-wife-latham-watkins-lawyer-2021-10-22/

https://abcnews.go.com/US/crew-members-hospitalized-prop-gun-misfires-set-alec/story?id=80715740

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2021/oct/21/fbi-file-disproves-trump-alfa-bank-link/

[WhiteFeather]

[The account, the presence of the bullet, it doesn't stack up.

Yes, there's a bunch of stuff that's super-hard to even try to explain without a bunch more established facts.

One thought that's been poking me internally, and which I can't quite dismiss — even though that, too, seems almost impossible to imagine – is that the young armorer, Hannah Gutierrez-Reed, didn't know the difference between a live round and a dummy.

A dummy, that is, not a blank. Live rounds and dummies are intentionally near-identical in appearance, but a dummy rattles, as it's filled with BB shot rather than gunpowder.

Again, that'd be practically impossible to credit, and no-one anywhere has even mentioned that for a moment as a theoretical explanation. But it would actually fully account for the gross, base-level screw-up. The entire thing would then make sense. Everything else that happened (and there was a lot of it!!) could be regarded as lesser, but still contributory, negligence.

I have contacts from Hollywood that are adamant about live rounds being impossible to have on set unless the crew approves/wants it. It has been speculated amongst some anons that the whole thing was a sham and it was to get Halyna Hutchins into witness protection (fake hit/fake death). The reason for this theory is purely because her Husband worked for the Clintons via Perkins Coie Law Firm, working alongside Michael Sussman.

I was going to source the info about Hutchins working with Sussman, but articles are being deleted/have been deleted already unfortunately.

Edit - the links do work, it was just all stuck together in a mess of links.

https://www.reuters.com/legal/legalindustry/alec-baldwin-shooting-victim-was-wife-latham-watkins-lawyer-2021-10-22/

https://abcnews.go.com/US/crew-members-hospitalized-prop-gun-misfires-set-alec/story?id=80715740

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2021/oct/21/fbi-file-disproves-trump-alfa-bank-link/

So is it be believed that Hutchins is still Alive?

[mizo]

There is now a suggestion, from the attorney for the armorer on the set of the Alec Baldwin movie “Rust” that what happened may not have been a tragic accident but murder.
https://twitter.com/GeorgePapa19/status/1455965520444813312?s=20

[One]

https://scontent.fceb1-2.fna.fbcdn.net/v/t39.30808-6/245945288_4463701800374669_6103930965201367866_n.jpg?_nc_cat=100&ccb=1-5&_nc_sid=8bfeb9&_nc_eui2=AeEbKBmJJGMhnGQkjR7CB_chHSe9X36rb78dJ71ffqtvv4-aJSg7_wyYXI6MiF5J8M_jF_q7miH88yrSy1uPtlsZ&_nc_ohc=FOEC6VrH9GwAX8KYnet&_nc_ht=scontent.fceb1-2.fna&oh=bb058162225a67962226d5a0326c9fcc&oe=617A54E9

That is a facebook link that shows an image of a tweet by Hutchins days before her death:

47744

Holy smokes, Batman. Problem is, nothing I've found (yet) verifies this as a genuine tweet, because -

Halyna Hutchins' twitter account has been completely scrubbed!

Nothing remains, not a single tweet: https://twitter.com/HalynaHutchins

That is odd. I don't recall dead celebs or any hot-topic dead persons having their social media wiped right after their death.

Too early to say if there's anything in this. That image could easily be shopped, but it's suspicious.

Finding several mentions of a potentially new viral meme;

"Alec Baldwin didn't kill himself."

This is with reference to the image of the tweet stating "I have information that will lead to the arrest of Hilary Clinton" that is not embedded properly in the quoted text.

I am convinced I saw this posted in at least one, if not two popular Telegram channels (or possibly 107 daily) before the incident. I didn't know of Halyna at the time but remember thinking it was a dangerous statement to make. I also thought about screenshotting it myself in case I was right about the danger. A pity I didn't as I can no longer find it after much searching. It also stood out for being short & consequential and yet I couldn't find anything remotely similar. I didn't see the other screenshot about the next movie or whatever it was.

So for me there was plenty of motive and highly unlikely to be an accident imo. I'm surprised nobody else here saw it.

[7alon]

[The account, the presence of the bullet, it doesn't stack up.

Yes, there's a bunch of stuff that's super-hard to even try to explain without a bunch more established facts.

One thought that's been poking me internally, and which I can't quite dismiss — even though that, too, seems almost impossible to imagine – is that the young armorer, Hannah Gutierrez-Reed, didn't know the difference between a live round and a dummy.

A dummy, that is, not a blank. Live rounds and dummies are intentionally near-identical in appearance, but a dummy rattles, as it's filled with BB shot rather than gunpowder.

Again, that'd be practically impossible to credit, and no-one anywhere has even mentioned that for a moment as a theoretical explanation. But it would actually fully account for the gross, base-level screw-up. The entire thing would then make sense. Everything else that happened (and there was a lot of it!!) could be regarded as lesser, but still contributory, negligence.

I have contacts from Hollywood that are adamant about live rounds being impossible to have on set unless the crew approves/wants it. It has been speculated amongst some anons that the whole thing was a sham and it was to get Halyna Hutchins into witness protection (fake hit/fake death). The reason for this theory is purely because her Husband worked for the Clintons via Perkins Coie Law Firm, working alongside Michael Sussman.

I was going to source the info about Hutchins working with Sussman, but articles are being deleted/have been deleted already unfortunately.

Edit - the links do work, it was just all stuck together in a mess of links.

https://www.reuters.com/legal/legalindustry/alec-baldwin-shooting-victim-was-wife-latham-watkins-lawyer-2021-10-22/

https://abcnews.go.com/US/crew-members-hospitalized-prop-gun-misfires-set-alec/story?id=80715740

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2021/oct/21/fbi-file-disproves-trump-alfa-bank-link/

So is it be believed that Hutchins is still Alive?

Yes so I'm told. :thumbsup:

[Pam]

I don't believe any of this.

It's all too 'on the nose'.I'm curious... what's the "any of this" that you don't believe?

It's a question that deserves a proper answer Bill and I'll do my best to provide one later. For now, I should say I'm viewing world events through a particular lens, based on the following premises:

There's a war on.
It's primarily fought in the information arena.
Some of the events presented as organic news are scripted and this is one of them.

So I'm already 'out there' I guess in terms of assumptions, however...

I don't buy the account of the shooting, I've been on sets, worked with armourers. They are serious people. As are film producers, every second on a film set money is being burned through. Shots are prepared and rehearsed in advance. The account, the presence of the bullet, it doesn't stack up.

There's a lot more, but I'm on a tablet that's about to give up the ghost. Let me get to a keyboard, likely tomorrow now and I'll try and give a more reasoned backstory to that rather flippant post of mine above.

I share your perspective, that every single event that is reported by the MSM needs to be considered from the perspective that we are involved in a war and the the primary weapon of those that would harm us is propaganda (and the injection), with the goal of creating our perspective of the world with the ultimate goal of controlling us. I would go further and say that I look for the programming in any movies or anything I read.

I always wrote off symbology as not being as significant as the likes of David Icke and others have said. I now believe that was a huge mistake in my thinking. Everything that happens here, every symbol has some information contained in it. I definitely have a lot to learn in that area.

Even an organic event will be used in the programming effort and of course we know events are created to further the agenda, either way they will will contain information and suggestions as to how they want us to perceive and think.

I'm still willing to bet a donut that Alec gets a hand slapping at worse and no legal consequences for what appears to be involuntary manslaughter...It will be interesting to see how they pull this off, although there is not even much pretention that we have working legal system, at least not for the elite and wealthy in the US any more so maybe they won't even feel much of a need to rationalize the double standard at all.

[Hym]

This predictable event, especially happening within a local, statewide film union with such a dismal worker's rights history, is a good representation of the many issues that face the film industry.

Just as our friend Brook/Shadowself had said to me about her son's experiences in the film union as an inventive and active sound technician and whose death she suspected as being foul play, there are many things wrong in the film industry.

On some levels the tragic death of this cinematographer mirror and duplicate a societal wide, even a worldwide, pattern of control, limiting the public's availability to truths about the real working conditions that threaten the health, both physical and mental health, of those employed by the industries that provide the incomes necessary to live healthy lives.

In New Mexico, where the movie "Rust" was being filmed, the highly controlled media is at this time more reluctant to publish any added negative information about those involved in the industry, when in all of the many years I've lived in the state there seems to have been no reluctance at all to present the arrest and detainment of those who have been detained and accused of certain crimes.

In just such a recent case, the absence of reporting is stark and all the more a reminder of who controls those community flash points that can be used as catalysts of positive change, instead of being hidden for 'social convenience'.....incidents that are the worst of crimes against the innocent.

The recent arrest of a well known line producer of many films shot in the state, who was, until recently an acting school owner, and an actor who got his start in the working, below the line film union itself has had only a small reporting profile in the state's newspapers and but a few quick reports on local, statewide t.v..

In any other instance, if the t.v. station managers weren't paid by the film industry entertainment liaison officers/elo's, military intelligence officers, or any other trained film industry controllers who represent the interests of those who control the media, to omit any such reporting, the information would be all over the news. It wasn't.

In this case the line producer had been confronted by the mother of an under 13 child about him molesting her for 5 years. This was/is his biological daughter and he did not, according to the mother's testimony, deny the mother's accusations. Instead he, as to the mother's testimony to the police investigators, tried to bribe her in order to keep the matter from being reported to authorities. He was arrested shortly after the mother reported the horrible accounts to the police, but the media did little to cover what should have been reported, especially since that line producer/actor/acting school owner (now former owner) may have had a history of such abuse with his access to young girls in the past.

I was the coordinator on a film he line produced just a few years ago and I did not like the way he attempted to manipulate tradespeople in order to pocket parts of their incomes for himself, even as some of his attempts turned out to be comical when those same tradespeople, like the transportation captain, put him in his place, threatening to leave the entire production high and dry. When his arrest came I was reminded of how all of the other criminals in the industry had been protected from being righteously arrested for bribery and abuse of fellow union members.

Before the line producer's arrest I had been offered a film from the producers of the same one I had worked on and said to a friend who had also worked on that film, that if that same line producer was on the sequel, I'd refuse to work on it unless he was replaced. It is a mute point with me now as I'm not going back into film, under present conditions industrywide nor within the state film union's present need for a deep cleansing.

Yet, it's not as if I need any affirmation of anything negative when I see absolutely nothing being done to strengthen the voices of union members, the ones who are the most important, living, working, structural components of film production.

[Journeyman]

I don't believe any of this.

It's all too 'on the nose'.I'm curious... what's the "any of this" that you don't believe?

It's a question that deserves a proper answer Bill and I'll do my best to provide one later. For now, I should say I'm viewing world events through a particular lens, based on the following premises:

There's a war on.
It's primarily fought in the information arena.
Some of the events presented as organic news are scripted and this is one of them.

So I'm already 'out there' I guess in terms of assumptions, however...

I don't buy the account of the shooting, I've been on sets, worked with armourers. They are serious people. As are film producers, every second on a film set money is being burned through. Shots are prepared and rehearsed in advance. The account, the presence of the bullet, it doesn't stack up.

There's a lot more, but I'm on a tablet that's about to give up the ghost. Let me get to a keyboard, likely tomorrow now and I'll try and give a more reasoned backstory to that rather flippant post of mine above.

I forgot to return to this which was remiss of me. :o

I could go back through the various anomalies that leapt out about this event, but I imagine by now we've all seen at least some of them. From a distance it feels very 'hinky', as indeed so much does these days. I've written before about my feeling that we're increasingly living within a scripted reality (https://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?113728-You-re-watching-a-movie). Either that, or twas ever thus and we're just starting to see the seams in the fabricated reality, at least a little more than before.

The feeling is particularly strong in regards to the US at present. None of the key incidents stand up to prolonged scrutiny, George Floyd, Kyle Rittenhouse, Ashley Babbit etc etc. I believe all of these have the hands of the secret societies all over them.

I think this is one more example. To what end? This is harder to state and I understand any of you turning away at this point and wondering what I'm basing this on. If I had to guess I'd say it's a tale designed to increase polarisation, to surface certain stories or themes and it is probably best understood as part of a wider piece rather than as an organic incident in its own right.

So, not an an answer that's going to stand up in court, so maybe I just have to go back to my base intuition, it's hinky!

[Hym]

Yes Journeyman, there is lot of hinkiness going on most everywhere now, but this film hinky is part of the state it's in.

Now that the Area Standards Agreement, between the film union and the producer's guild, has been ratified by a very slim margin, I expect that the producer's guild and the producers themselves will carry on business as usual, and as a result "accidents" like the ones on Rust will continue to happen.

I just got a call from a friend. He called me to see if I could spend a couple of days on a low budget union film, helping him. I hadn't talked to him in two years because he has always been busy, but I was very happy to talk with him, in spite of the odd request. I felt it was more consternation on his part, wanting someone else there who would stand with him in what I immediately got as a call for help.
I said that under the current mandates, and likely forever, I'm thru with film, and I prompted him to tell me more, knowing that there had to be another reason for me to join him than just helping out a production on a tight schedule and working with me.

It turns out that just like the film 'Rust' the crew hadn't been paid in three weeks. Though that film had all of the ingredients going for at least one major injury to happen, the industry in the state of new mexico is on the top of the list for any production that wants to take advantage of a union crew.

Pay 'em late, overwork them, abuse them, rush everything, promise housing for distant workers but ignore the promise, etc.. Someone, I heard it was a producer, told the crew to file a grievance, which is an odd recommendation for a producer to make. Maybe the producer is confident that the union won't do anything about it.

Film doesn't mean that much to me, and in the world of work it doesn't mean that much to many of the workers in it. It's a job, and one I only took a while back because I have building skills and my friends who asked me to work with them. I'm grateful for the friends I've met and the different skills I learned, but I have never missed any of it.

Watching a business fail is not healthy viewing when you're in it. And, I've stopped writing to all of those now running for union offices. It's not worth the effort when our concerns aren't ever addressed by them, and in my case those people know they wouldn't be let off easy or at all, until those concerns were addressed with actions.

Some here know me and I think that they have a good idea about the intensity of my writings about film union affairs with union officials, all too cutting to be shared here.
I don't think that this is the appropriate forum to write about all of the b.s. that film workers have gone thru, but it would be real entertainment, considering it's all real to those who've endured it.

[TargeT]

and.... clown world....

bUW8sS_deEc

[Sérénité]

There is talk that Halyna was involved in something about to expose an elite peado ring, meanwhile Alec’s name appears in Jeffrey Epstein’s little black book...

https://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/1508273/pages/jeffrey-epsteins-little-black-book-redacted-p4-large.gif?ts=1604078963820.102

Both silenced in one shot or sheer coincidence?

[Kryztian]

5 key takeaways from Alec Baldwin's exclusive interview with George Stephanopoulos

The star reflected on a fatal shooting on the set of "Rust."
By Lucien Bruggeman
December 3, 2021, 8:21 AM
https://abcnews.go.com/Entertainment/key-takeaways-alec-baldwins-exclusive-interview-george-stephanopoulos/story?id=81519931

For the first time, Alec Baldwin discussed at length what happened surrounding the fatal "Rust" shooting and how he is grappling with the fallout in an exclusive interview with ABC News' George Stephanopoulos.

Several major questions remain unanswered, including how a live bullet wound up in the antique Colt .45 revolver that discharged in Baldwin's hand, killing the film's cinematographer Halyna Hutchins and wounding its director, Joel Souza.

Baldwin's emotional interview cast fresh light on the tragic incident.

Here are five key takeaways:

Baldwin says he 'didn't pull the trigger,' and was following Hutchins' direction at time of shooting

Baldwin told Stephanopoulos that he never pulled the trigger of the prop gun, but rather cocked it. He said when he released the hammer, it unexpectedly discharged a live bullet.

During a marking rehearsal for a complicated shooting scene, Baldwin said Hutchins was directing him on what angle to position the gun to capture the best shot. Hutchins was directing his every move, he said, "Everything is at her direction."

"She's guiding me through how she wants me to hold the gun for this angle," Baldwin said. "I'm holding the gun where she told me to hold it, which ended up being aimed right below her armpit."

"So, I take the gun and I start to cock the gun. I'm not going to pull the trigger," he continued. "And I cock the gun, I go, 'Can you see that? Can you see that? Can you see that?' And then I let go of the hammer of the gun, and the gun goes off. I let go of the hammer of the gun – the gun goes off."

"So you never pulled the trigger?" Stephanopoulos asked.

"No, no, no, no, no," Baldwin said. "I would never point a gun at anyone and pull a trigger at them. Never. Never. That was the training that I had."

A lawsuit filed in mid-November by the film's script supervisor, Mamie Mitchell, accused Baldwin, who is named as a defendant in the civil suit, of "playing Russian roulette" with the gun by pointing it at Hutchins.

"There are some who say you're never supposed to point a gun on anyone on a set no matter what," Stephanopoulos pressed.

"Unless the person is the cinematographer, who's directing me at where to point the gun for her camera angle," Baldwin replied. "I didn't point the gun at her, and she said, 'Hey, man, don't point the gun at me.' I pointed the gun in a direction she wanted."

Baldwin says he doesn't feel guilt, but the shooting left a heavy toll

"Do you feel guilt?," Stephanopoulos asked.

"No. No," Baldwin said. "I feel that someone is responsible for what happened, and I can't say who that is, but I know it's not me."

Baldwin said he has succumbed to the emotional toll of what happened and the fact that Hutchins lost her life. He said he is struggling to get through each day and re-living the incident at night.

"I have dreams about this constantly now," he said. "I go through my day, and I make it through the day. Then I collapse at the end of the day. Emotionally, I collapse."

When he met with Hutchins' widow and 9-year-old son after Hutchins' death, Baldwin said the two men embraced. He said he was at a loss for words during their meeting.

"I didn't know what to say," Baldwin recalled. "He goes like, 'I suppose you and I are going to go through this together," he said. And I thought, 'Well, not as much as you are.'"

Meeting Hutchins' son, Baldwin said, invoked thoughts of his own children and how they adore their mother.

"And this boy doesn't have a mother anymore," he said. And there's nothing we can do to bring her back. And I told him, I said, "I don't know what to say. I don't know how to convey to you how sorry I am."

As investigation marches on, Baldwin downplays the risk of facing criminal charges

The Santa Fe County Sheriff's Office continues to investigate how a live bullet made its way on set and into the Colt .45 that discharged in Baldwin's hand.

Investigators continue releasing new information, and this week indicated they were closing in on an explanation for the source of the live bullet. The district attorney told ABC News criminal charges remain "on the table."

For his part, Baldwin said he doesn't believe he will face criminal charges for the tragedy.

"I've been told by people who are in the know, in terms of even inside the state, that it's highly unlikely that I would be charged with anything criminally," he said.

But the criminal probe and potential charges account for only part of Baldwin's legal troubles. He has already been named as a defendant in two civil lawsuits.

Baldwin responds to critics, including Trump, Clooney

In the wake of the shooting, Baldwin attracted attention from some high-profile critics, including former President Donald Trump. Baldwin had been a vocal critic of Trump and portrayed the former president in a recurring impersonation role on "Saturday Night Live."

Trump called Baldwin "cuckoo" and intimated that he may have deliberately fired the weapon at Hutchins.

"[Trump] said I did it ​deliberately... with Trump, as we all know, the bar isn't low, the bar is in the dirt," Baldwin said. "I mean, just when you think that things can't get more surreal, here is the former president of the United States making a comment on this tragic situation."

Fellow actors also weighed in. George Clooney, for example, said, "every single time I'm handed a gun on a set -- every time they had me a gun -- I look at it, I open it, I show it to the person I'm pointing it to."

Baldwin called Clooney's thinly veiled criticism "misplaced."

"There were a lot of people who felt it necessary to contribute some comment to the situation, which really didn't help the situation at all," he said. "If your protocol is you checking the gun every time, well, good for you."

Baldwin says he 'can't imagine' taking roles in films with guns in the future

The fallout from Hutchins' death has rattled Baldwin, he said, to the point that he "couldn't give a s--- about [his career] anymore." And while he remained opaque on what type of roles he will take on in the future, he made one assurance.

"I can't imagine I'd ever do a movie that had a gun in it again," Baldwin said.

The "Rust" shooting has inspired several other actors, including Dwayne "The Rock" Johnson, to pledge to use only fake guns in future films. Others, including Olivia Wilde, have signed a petition to ban the use of real guns on Hollywood film sets.

Baldwin called for changes to ensure that sets are safe.

"Guns are in films and television shows because that's what audiences want," he said. "I'm only saying that whatever steps we have to take to put another layer of security so that doesn't happen again."

[thepainterdoug]

not getting the true story as of yet, and perhaps we never will.

[Satori]

This present stance is likely due to: 1) legal advice designed to minimize civil or criminal liability, 2) family encouragement, and 3) a need to rationalize his conduct and to revise history to assuage his sense of remorse and guilt.

There is no way that pistol can be fired without pulling the trigger. Full stop.

Also, he did point the pistol at her. Whether intentionally or negligently. Had he not done that, even if it did "misfire" which it did not, then the bullet would not have hit her. Also, a "misfire" of a firearm only happens when one pulls the trigger and the round does not discharge. The word "misfire" and phrase "prop gun" are intentionally being used in a deceptive manner.

I wonder if he, or someone, had pulled the hammer back on the firearm while handling it. If so, in that position it may have been easier to pull the trigger and discharge the firearm. Perhaps in that position, and if the firearm was defective and being mishandled or jostled around, the hammer may release and fire the round without "pulling" the trigger. But again, if that happened, the firearm was pointed at the decedent and civil liability, and perhaps criminal liability, follows.

[Bill Ryan]

I wonder if he, or someone, had pulled the hammer back on the firearm while handling it.He stated that when pointing the gun at the camera, he pulled the hammer back (without cocking it), and then let it go. In a period single-action revolver from the wild west, that's exactly the same as pulling the trigger.

If Baldwin somehow didn't know that, it could be argued that's negligence in itself.

About the interview, there's no way that wouldn't have been very carefully planned (running everything he would say past his lawyers), and very probably rehearsed. And all the questions and responses would have been agreed beforehand, as his public statements about the incident would all be admissible evidence in court, where it seems he'll be very likely to find himself before not too long.

[Bill Ryan]

About the interview, there's no way that wouldn't have been very carefully planned (running everything he would say past his lawyers), and very probably rehearsed. And all the questions and responses would have been agreed beforehand, as his public statements about the incident would all be admissible evidence in court, where it seems he'll be very likely to find himself before not too long.Having said that, and also having just watched this interesting short piece, it appears I may well have been quite wrong in all of the above. :)


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KRVrxyiaw5Y

[Dennis Leahy]

I don't have much experience with guns where you can (or must) pull back on the hammer to cock it, but the trigger is simply a one-finger (index finger) way to both cock and release the hammer. So, I'm agreeing with Bill's statement about that Colt 45: releasing the hammer which strikes the back of the bullet is what makes the bullet fire. You could shoot all six bullets out of a "six-shooter" with your thumb, one at a time, and never touch the trigger at all. In fact, we have seen a variation of just that many times in "Wild West" movies, where a six-gun is rapidly emptied without ever touching the trigger - instead of using the thumb on the gun hand to cock and release the trigger, the edge of the palm of the opposite hand waves across the hammer rapidly.

Saying that you "didn't pull the trigger" is disingenuous. Was Baldwin trying to say that Halyna was literally directing him to cock the hammer with his thumb?

I note the use of passive voice, "the gun went off", rather than, "Alec shot a gun", then switching out of passive voice to deny guilt - which is certainly not by accident, and is narrative control. So, even if Baldwin damaged himself in a criminal lawsuit (which will be settled out of court) by what he said, I think that Bill's initial reaction (post #125) on this point is correct, that this use of passive voice to describe one's actions is deliberate narrative control.

edit (I want to leave this note on my post stating that I was incorrect about my assumption that a shooter could discharge a Colt 45 with thumb on hammer only, and without the trigger being pulled. The trigger must be pulled.)

[Gracy]

I don't have much experience with guns where you can (or must) pull back on the hammer to cock it, but the trigger is simply a one-finger (index finger) way to both cock and release the hammer. So, I'm agreeing with Bill's statement about that Colt 45: releasing the hammer which strikes the back of the bullet is what makes the bullet fire. You could shoot all six bullets out of a "six-shooter" with your thumb, one at a time, and never touch the trigger at all. In fact, we have seen a variation of just that many times in "Wild West" movies, where a six-gun is rapidly emptied without ever touching the trigger - instead of using the thumb on the gun hand to cock and release the trigger, the edge of the palm of the opposite hand waves across the hammer rapidly.

The trigger has to be pulled, or kept pulled for the bullets to fly, no matter what. The guns in question are single action, meaning the hammer doesn't automatically retract again for subsequent shots as modern double actions do. But the old single actions can actually be fired faster than many double actions by keeping the trigger pulled, and working the hammer to fire each round.

The first 4 minutes of this video shows how it's done, including slow motion shots which are quite helpful because it happens so fast. He's only firing two rounds, but the method is the same if you're going to rapidly empty the whole chamber like in those old cowboy movies.
dy4D5n8LQ6U

[Satori]

I wonder if he, or someone, had pulled the hammer back on the firearm while handling it.He stated that when pointing the gun at the camera, he pulled the hammer back (without cocking it), and then let it go. In a period single-action revolver from the wild west, that's exactly the same as pulling the trigger.

If Baldwin somehow didn't know that, it could be argued that's negligence in itself.

About the interview, there's no way that wouldn't have been very carefully planned (running everything he would say past his lawyers), and very probably rehearsed. And all the questions and responses would have been agreed beforehand, as his public statements about the incident would all be admissible evidence in court, where it seems he'll be very likely to find himself before not too long.

Interesting. I had not and have not (and will not) watched the interview.

Pulling the hammer back and releasing it will not cause a round to fire unless the hammer is pulled back only partially and there is an unspent round in the magazine that did not advance when the hammer was pulled back and released. But in that situation the force of the hammer as it strikes the casing may not be enough to cause the gun powder to ignite and fire the round. (That would be an example of one way a gun can misfire.) If the hammer is pulled back all the way and the next live round is advanced into the space under the hammer, then the hammer can cause that live round to fire but only if the trigger has been pulled so as to allow the hammer to propel forward and strike the live round. This is a mechanical process. All moving parts as designed must function as designed and intended.

Gracy’s post and the video she embedded (of which I only viewed a small portion) demonstrates this mechanical process, albeit by a professional at very high speed.

[Le Chat]

As a resident of the UK and having never seen the type gun that was used (nor any hand gun for that matter), I find all the hammer/trigger debate interesting.
A fas as I was concerned (before reading these posts), the only way to fire a gun would be to pull the trigger...

[Dennis Leahy]

...
The trigger has to be pulled, or kept pulled for the bullets to fly, no matter what. The guns in question are single action, meaning the hammer doesn't automatically retract again for subsequent shots as modern double actions do. But the old single actions can actually be fired faster than many double actions by keeping the trigger pulled, and working the hammer to fire each round.
...If you are correct, Gracy, then Baldwin must have had the trigger pulled when he was maneuvering the hammer. If the hammer is cocked, or even half-cocked (but still mechanically restrained), the trigger must be pulled to release the hammer. But, what happens if you have a bullet in the chamber and you pull the hammer back just shy of it clicking into the half-cocked position, and release it? The hammer will strike the bullet. Does it have enough energy to fire the bullet's firing pin? Evidently, not by design. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I8NSDCNTRaQ (first 7 minutes)

[scotslad]

personally, I don't think doing the "interview" was a good idea, whether scripted, quizzed or practiced I think its bad PR and not giving off the right signals at all.

Far too much "Poor me"

Time to let the determination of "criminality" or negligence (or both) to begin.

If my wife had been shot by a movie star and they did an interview to get their side of the story across, before a court case or otherwise and before discussing it with me, I think I'd be left feeling rather bitter, disappointed, shocked etc at all the publicity and social media posts at all the poor attempts of positioning and posturing.

I'd think the actor was just doing yet another "me. me. me." and as for his wife, are they trying to outdo each other how awful and upset they are feeling?

Be humble. Be authentic. Be sincere, and stop acting (again) to the camera with crocodile tears. More importantly think of the feelings of the grieving family not yourself - best say nothing (pubicly)

What you say to me privately and also in the presence of our legal representatives should set the right tone and hopefully right path of trying to deal and cope with all this - not watching you do an outpuring on TV.

Personally, Id find hard to swallow, digest and get over - and I suspect a jury would think so too.

(dont know tho)

Is there any outtake / daily footage or photos that can help substantiate any of what actually happened?

[pyrangello]

interview shouldn't have been , its not all about me, didn't even watch the entire thing, maybe its a form of counseling for him to do it in his own mind, who knows ! In another twist and I don't know if this is true or not but interesting. I don't know if this is too far off the deep end but I would throw it out there. replys and discredits welcomed on this one if they apply.

Sudden Death

During these polarized times, any death is suspect. People are killed to be silenced, but the assassination posed as an accident or suicide. The Satanists are on the run. Covid-19 statistics are faked to show big numbers of death and injury from the virus while denying the death and injury from the vaccines themselves. In that setting we have the fatal shooting by Alec Baldwin on a movie set, which no one really believes was an accident. And then the death of a respected statesman, Colin Powell, supposedly by Covid-19 (though he was 100% vaccinated). Could the Zetas give us the truth on these matters?

Prop Gun in Alec Baldwin Accidental Movie Set Shooting had Live Rounds, Police Say
October 23, 2021
https://www.oann.com/alec-baldwin-fired-prop-gun-that-killed-crew-member
Alec Baldwin was handed what was described as a safe “cold gun” on the set of his movie “Rust”, but the prop gun contained live rounds when it was fired, according to details of the police investigation into the fatal shooting. The shot hit cinematographer Halyna Hutchins in the chest, and director Joel Souza who was behind her, in the shoulder. The assistant director who handed Baldwin the prop gun did not know it contained live rounds. Reports emerged of walk-outs on the “Rust” set earlier in the week over unsafe conditions. Production on the movie was immediately shut down. The sheriff’s department said no charges had been filed and the investigation remained open.

Alec Baldwin Shooting Victim was Wife of Latham & Watkins Lawyer
October 22, 2021
https://www.reuters.com/legal/legalindustry/alec-baldwin-shooting-victim
The husband of Halyna Hutchins, the cinematographer who was fatally shot by actor Alec Baldwin with a prop gun, is a corporate lawyer in Latham & Watkins' Los Angeles office.

The Husband of the Woman Alec Baldwin Killed Yesterday is a Clinton Attorney with Latham & Watkins that is being Indicted by Durham
October 22, 2021
https://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/comments/qdw9ln/the_husband
Arkanacide by proxy? Michael Sussmann is the Hillary Clinton/DNC lawyer being indicted by Durham, he does not work for Latham & Watkins. But Latham & Watkins is representing Sussmann in the case.

ZetaTalk Confirmation 10/31/2021: Was Baldwin ordered to shoot Halyna Hutchins to silence her? This is obvious, as there was no reason for him to point and shoot the prop gun. They were not filming the movie at that time, and it is standard procedure to double check the bullets if that is to occur. The crew that loaded the live bullets is complicit too, but Baldwin was fully aware and complicit. She was to be a witness against Clinton associates and had already given testimony to Durham et al. Halyna’s murder is also a warning to others not to talk

[onawah]

:bump: Another Arkancide! Now, that makes sense!


Alec Baldwin Shooting Victim was Wife of Latham & Watkins Lawyer
October 22, 2021
https://www.reuters.com/legal/legalindustry/alec-baldwin-shooting-victim
The husband of Halyna Hutchins, the cinematographer who was fatally shot by actor Alec Baldwin with a prop gun, is a corporate lawyer in Latham & Watkins' Los Angeles office.

The Husband of the Woman Alec Baldwin Killed Yesterday is a Clinton Attorney with Latham & Watkins that is being Indicted by Durham
October 22, 2021
https://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/comments/qdw9ln/the_husband
Arkanacide by proxy? Michael Sussmann is the Hillary Clinton/DNC lawyer being indicted by Durham, he does not work for Latham & Watkins. But Latham & Watkins is representing Sussmann in the case.

ZetaTalk Confirmation 10/31/2021: Was Baldwin ordered to shoot Halyna Hutchins to silence her? This is obvious, as there was no reason for him to point and shoot the prop gun. They were not filming the movie at that time, and it is standard procedure to double check the bullets if that is to occur. The crew that loaded the live bullets is complicit too, but Baldwin was fully aware and complicit. She was to be a witness against Clinton associates and had already given testimony to Durham et al. Halyna’s murder is also a warning to others not to talk

[Hym]

"But, what happens if you have a bullet in the chamber and you pull the hammer back just shy of it clicking into the half-cocked position, and release it? The hammer will strike the bullet. Does it have enough energy to fire the bullet's firing pin? "

Yes, but this all depends on the strength of the main spring that moves the hammer. Tho the uncocked hammer seems to be "safer" it too can set off the primer, firing the bullet, if the hammer is hit with force, as the pin at the end of the hammer is resting on the primer at the end of the bullet. Because of this, when an armorer has questions about any actor handling a weapon the extra safe guard is to leave the action cylinder empty when handling the gun.

This is never a plan that there are live rounds in any weapon handed over from an armorer to an actor, yet EVERY WEAPON IS ALWAYS ASSUMED TO BE LOADED and it is the unending and forever action and habit of every armorer to always treat all weapons as LIVE. Saying a weapon is 'cold' goes against every safety precaution that any armorer, any shooter, practices every single time a weapon is handled.

In this case I don't believe Baldwin. It is most likely with that gun that he had his finger on the trigger and that upon releasing the hammer the pin hit the primer and discharged the bullet. There is likely footage showing whether or not Baldwin was flagging the gun when he was rehearsing. Though there was a production or crew member who told a reporter that he did not have his finger on the trigger, I would not trust that statement.

(Flagging is showing the trigger finger, the index finger most often, or the trigger finger and the middle finger, on the side of the gun above the trigger guard pointing forward and clearly not resting on the trigger itself. In this case the person giving the interview backing up Baldwin's account of not pulling the trigger, it is notable that she did not use the word.)

The live round being in the gun is another fact that will find the light of day, hopefully during the litigation of the lawsuits filed against the production. My experience with the film union there in the state tells me much more about how it all happened than the actual shooting itself. When we talk about the atmosphere on a film set every one responds one way or the other. Not having been there, what I've heard tells me that it was what is called a very loose set. That crew knows much more than is being reported, and it matters when searching for the truth.

Those in the union for years have predicted this and many more injuries and deaths a long time ago. My short tenure there showed me the same experiences, and my close relationship with the veterans who've left the film union there, and those about to leave, exposed more of the reasons why an atmosphere conducive to abusing union film crews has existed for so long.

Having rid themselves of the worst of long suffered union leadership, only to hire and fire/retire/disconnect with five business agents in only two years tells us a lot about the depth of disarray in a union that productions like Rust knew they could exploit.

Every single, experienced film crew member in that state can attest to how dangerous their lives are when working for many productions, less so with studio based productions but exponentially more so with all of the one off, LLC created, independent productions.

Film crews from every other local in the states and Canada have a very low opinion of not only the leadership of the union that allows lax safety practices, but of it also allowing the financials to be almost forgotten when paying union members. Though the union on it's unemployment filings lists itself as a hiring hall, it is nothing of the sort.

There is no common ground that having experience and crew care as a qualification guarantees any work, which is what a 'hiring hall' is, but being a newbie who can be manipulated and convinced to allow poor safety and abuse of fellow crew members means a greater chance of being hired. This has created a crew base of unskilled members in positions that they should not be in, thus the acceptance on the union leadership's behalf of the danger inherent in allowing such exploitation.

This situation is both a tragic series of negligent missteps and an atmosphere of neglect fostered by the union itself. This should be the beginning of deep investigations by the few uncontrolled reporters, the real journalists, themselves but we know how much the media these many years restricts and blocks deeper views into the working lives of film crews.

Like I've said before, there is a Pulitzer waiting for who dares to simply ask current crews and the vast numbers of past film crew members why none of them is surprised that someone died on a set in New Mexico, or that there is so much confusion as to how that death occurred.

In addition, if a murder was planned, what better place than in a state where the union is so weak and the workers are in a great state of flux trying to re-establish their careers and put some weeks and months into their incomes and health plans.

In a state where there has been little to no blowback from the imposition of very unhealthy, pseudo-emergency mandates from the planned pandemic, it seems like a good choice.....but only if all of the available career killers on the bill and hillary payroll were out of work....which is highly unlikely. There are much easier ways of taking out a whistleblower than making it such a public display, tho that at times is the point during some operations. Still...that is just speculation at this point.

[onawah]

But if it were meant as a warning to others?
In any case, the Clintons and their ilk don't appear to be concerned much anymore about covering their tracks.
The NWO agendas are becoming more and more blatant.



In a state where there has been little to no blowback from the imposition of very unhealthy, pseudo-emergency mandates from the planned pandemic, it seems like a good choice.....but only if all of the available career killers on the bill and hilary payroll were out of work....which is highly unlikely. There are much easier ways of taking out a whistleblower than making it such a public display, tho that at times is the point during some operations. Still...that is just speculation at this point.

[Bill Ryan]

I wonder if he, or someone, had pulled the hammer back on the firearm while handling it.He stated that when pointing the gun at the camera, he pulled the hammer back (without cocking it), and then let it go. In a period single-action revolver from the wild west, that's exactly the same as pulling the trigger.

It seems I'm 100% wrong. (Apologies!) I watched this excellent new short video very closely:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SwYvvTu-UYM
There's extensive discussion in the comments, between good people who clearly know a lot about these period revolvers, about whether there was any possible way the hammer could have been pulled back slightly (without catching, as it's meant to do) and then released to cause a live fire.

The unanimous agreement was that this was impossible, and nor had anyone ever encountered even a very old and disused weapon that would malfunction in this way.

The Santa Fe Police have the gun, and there's no doubt it's been subjected to every test. If it was defective, they'd have made a statement by now.

[Satori]

I wonder if he, or someone, had pulled the hammer back on the firearm while handling it.He stated that when pointing the gun at the camera, he pulled the hammer back (without cocking it), and then let it go. In a period single-action revolver from the wild west, that's exactly the same as pulling the trigger.

It seems I'm 100% wrong. (Apologies!) I watched this excellent new short video very closely:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SwYvvTu-UYM
There's extensive discussion in the comments, between good people who clearly know a lot about these period revolvers, about whether there was any possible way the hammer could have been pulled back slightly (without catching, as it's meant to do) and then released to cause a live fire.

The unanimous agreement was that this was impossible, and nor had anyone ever encountered even a very old and disused weapon that would malfunction in this way.

The Santa Fe Police have the gun, and there's no doubt it's been subjected to every test. If it was defective, they'd have made a statement by now.

I’ll just come out and say it: Baldwin is a liar. He pulled the trigger at some point. He F’d up and he needs to own up.

[scotslad]

"Bullets travel in straight lines." So if Alec Baldwin says he didnt point the gun at her, how did she get hit? Has he lied? (again?)

Hmmmmm https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lImxZbBaaSM

lImxZbBaaSM

[Satori]

The local ABC "news" outlet in New Mexico is reporting today that a search warrant has been issued for Alec Baldwin's phone records. This is a very typical and logical step in a criminal (or civil) investigation.

Who did he call after the shooting? Why? What was said? Did he incriminate himself? Etc....

This would have happened even if he had not done the interview with George Snuffalupacous, but he did himself no favors by doing that and saying what he said.

[Bill Ryan]

Folks, for anyone following this arguably pretty strange story, I'd highly recommend this video. They've done a bunch of Baldwin features before, but this is the one that really made me think.

It's a new channel that started in August. Mark Groubert is clearly the five star researcher (and wholly entertaining to listen to), and he could really have done the entire thing on his own except that he needs someone to talk to on camera.

As my own teaser for this video, I learned a whole bunch of things that I never knew before and which I'd suggest are impossible to say aren't fascinating — and in one or two cases, almost unbelievable. Tom Clancy could have scripted it. (Ooops... that was a spoiler. :) ) Enjoy!

(...and what's the hammer and sickle doing in the video thumbnail below...??)


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VrroTlOwHko

[holcaul]

Folks, for anyone following this arguably pretty strange story, I'd highly recommend this video. They've done a bunch of Baldwin features before, but this is the one that really made me think.

It's a new channel that started in August. Mark Groubert is clearly the five star researcher (and wholly entertaining to listen to), and he could really have done the entire thing on his own except that he needs someone to talk to on camera.

As my own teaser for this video, I learned a whole bunch of things that I never knew before and which I'd suggest are impossible to say aren't fascinating — and in one or two cases, almost unbelievable. Tom Clancy could have scripted it. (Ooops... that was a spoiler. :) ) Enjoy!

(...and what's the hammer and sickle doing in the video thumbnail below...??)


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VrroTlOwHko

Thank you Bill. This is Daniel Liszt level presentation. Very fascinating.

[Hym]

Differ I must.
Comparing a career long cee-Eye-aye insider, beginning with his interning summers in college at Lang Lee, VA, to Daniel Liszt's independence and voluminous studies and intellect...his directness and honesty, Well, that just stretches credulity way past the breaking point.

There's a big difference between real investigative reporting, not bound by intel-restricted narratives, even as colorful, AS ENTERTAINING, as they may be, and a chicken soup for the soul, cheat-sheet script writer.

Goober reminded me why entertainment is so boring. They'll tell you a small portion of the F'n obvious truth, but only 20, 30, 40, 50 years later with added, spicy tidbits they've heard from insiders to get your dumbed down attention. Never in the present. Never standing with those real ones risking it all for the truth. Yeah, entertainment....

The truth told after being held back that long becomes a crime in itself. When JFK said he would break up that agency and spread it to the ends of the earth, that was telling the truth. You're taking the narrative, now somehow magically moral, of someone whose career is intimately connected to that same, deeply evil agency and not questioning it ? Life and looking at the truth is a choice.

Truth and lazy invention, that neanderthal, wrinkled narrative. Candy sprinkles on top of horse shyte.
Hey Marky, it's finally okay now to go after this guy and that idea,
But REMEMBER, you're dead if you reveal any of the real facts that the card carrying ass wipes, I mean 'agents', have told you to keep secret.

So we are to believe that he knows nothing of the film business in the state, but how could he also still be an actor and a producer with his own production company and, with his insiders contacts not know that?. Hmmm...who could have funded all of that action? I call big time b.s..

Geez, his description of the shooting scene is entirely off. Research? Didn't hear any there. I'm not even curious about why he pretends not to know the condition of film workers in the state, when anyone in the film union or anyone from any of the studios working in the state, and any producer could tell him EXACTLY how messed up and manipulated it is. I know why he either doesn't know and should, or why he claims he doesn't know.

Now think what Daniel Liszt would do BEFORE he talked at length about the condition on that set during that time. We know Daniel enough to know he'd go deep into all aspects on that set, in the state, and the very wide gulf between those working a set and those using and abusing the workers on that set. Like all experiences that end up in tragedy, there is a history there, all which may be beyond MG's ability to comprehend. It all may be too banal for him.

Goober presenting the Mayflower Baldwin history in connection to Russia, the USSR, etc. and then comparing it to gross negligence on a cheap $7Mil. production, set with overstressed and underpaid workers, is the mark of a researcher stuck in his own narrative, enchanted with his own experiences, so much so that a very traumatic occurrence in the lives of dedicated professionals is beyond his understanding, maybe even his imagination.

Reminds me of the few slimy producers I've met, calling out other slimy producers who aren't quite Yale 'quality', you know that Bushy, rear end sniffing type, that 'quality'. Write another book, and make it either all fiction or all truth....or is that too much of a stretch for someone whose many careers are all about stretching the truth. And he criticizes steve pieczenik?...That is the kettle calling the kettle black, they are so alike.

[TargeT]

not getting the true story as of yet, and perhaps we never will.

welcome to always.... haha ;)

[Bill Ryan]

While this may seem trivial in the context of major global events impacting millions of people, this new video may be fascinating to anyone who's familiar with all the details and characters in the very complicated Baldwin/Halyna Hutchins 'Rust' shooting incident. (And there are a lot of both! But if you're unfamiliar, this may all make little sense.)

The video is a combo podcast between a lawyer and a tarot card reader. (Yes, you read that right. :) ) The lawyer is very familiar with everything, but the tarot card reader doesn't really know a lot about the people involved and has to have it all explained to him.

However, he's clearly very quick and bright — and, though I've never really given much credence to tarot readings myself, I was more than impressed with this.

With almost no front-loading, he seems to nail much of the cloudy backstory very credibly, and presented explanations about a whole bunch of things that up till now are still open questions. Enjoy. :)


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-U4IxqxE_6A

[The Moss Trooper]

I apologise in advance, off-topic I know, but relevant to Bill's post above.

At my lowest ebb, without a shadow-of-a-doubt....... Suicidaly so, a female friend of mine came and picked me up to go for a "coffee". We drove out into the countryside and arrived at an old farm with a stable block. In she took me, and sat at a very old and battered oak table was this, ........... character. A guy in his late 50's I'd say, plump, ruddy-cheeked and replete with full "country attire"..........., and fittingly so, very worn. There was even a pheasant's feather sticking out of the brim of his hat.

Almost a cliché, if ever I saw one.

What wasn't clichéd was what he did next. He invited me to sit opposite him and produced a tarot deck. He asked me to think of an animal that I related to, but to not say what. He then started to produce cards onto the table, explaining what they meant and........... To my utter amazement, stated to me exactly-what-I-was-going-through, the reason's why and the effect this was having upon myself & those closest to me.

It blew me away.

I've never had a session since, in fact, to be absolutely honest, I haven't given it a lot of thought since.................. I'm actually getting a little emotional now recalling it.

Some people just have a conduit to the "other", and we would do well to recognise this when in their midst.


:focus:

[ExomatrixTV]

1518725669680726020

[Bill Ryan]

For anyone who might be interested (and many reading this might not be! :P ), the update after many months of investigation — (why so long??) — is that the FBI has now made a formal statement (https://deadline.com/2022/08/rust-gun-could-not-fire-without-trigger-pull-fbi-report-1235091716/) that the gun, which was and is in perfect working order, could not have been discharged without Alec Baldwin pulling the trigger.
(My own comment, for what little it may be worth! It seems to me that Alec Baldwin didn't actually pull the trigger, as he has always claimed, but indeed held the gun with the trigger very slightly depressed — just enough to release the hammer after it was fully cocked. And while I personally regard Baldwin as the highest order of jerk, he may very well not have known that he'd done that.)
Here's a very concise 4 minute Fox News interview with criminal defense attorney Nicole DeBorde.

These are the possible outcomes of the 'Rust' shooting investigation


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EF-I-aTlyHg

[Ratszinger]

Yeah it isn't lookin' too good for him is it? Involuntary manslaughter is still a crime even if he didn't mean to do it. I mean if he hit her with his car it's an open and shut case. Doubt it would have taken months but I agree Bill. He either pulled the hammer back or he pulled the trigger. What still bothers me is how and why real firerarms were being used on the set instead of one of the man very real looking prop guns! Surely whoever authorized those real firearms to be there has to share some responsibility here IMO. Maybe that falls on Alec's shoulders as well tho. I really don't know.

[Kryztian]

I was driving in my car listening to classical music on the radio. It was a broadcast of the New York Philharmonic, and guess who was the host/announcer: Alec Baldwin. This is a job he has since 2009.

The radio station was part of New York Public Radio. In 2017, when the MeTOO movement was at it's height, two radio show hosts there, Jonathan Schwartz and Leonard Lopate were investigatied for "allegations of inappropriate conduct" at the workplace. They were immediately suspended from their jobs while an investigation took place, and eventually were both fired.

I don't know exactly what the "inappropriate conduct" actually was, but my first guess some form of sexual harassment. While this may have been awful for the people who had to work in those conditions, it is several degrees less awful than "murder" and "manslaughter". Baldwin does have a great narrating voice, but now, every time he talks about a Tchaikovsky symphony, all I can think is that this is the voice of someone who killed someone.

It's amazing how Whoopi Goldberg can get cancelled for the slip of the tongue that really didn't offend anyone, but not Baldwin, when his slip of his finger ended someone's life.

[TomKat]

Baldwin is a Democrat. 95% of Democrats got the mrna jab. Maybe it was another "vaxident?"

[iota]

Baldwin is a Democrat. 95% of Democrats got the mrna jab. Maybe it was another "vaxident?"

this should be a meme

:Angel:

[Inversion]

The New Mexico prosecutors indicate Alec could be charged for the death of Halyna Hutchins on the set of the movie Rust. Her family has filed a wrongful death lawsuit against him. He put his estate in the Hamptons on the market for 29 million in an apparent effort to shield his assets.

dailymail (https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11251195/Alec-Baldwin-selling-29million-Hamptons-home-shield-assets-looming-legal-battles.html)

Sep 26, 2022

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Owm2U83Ol3k

[Bill Ryan]

Well, this was unexpected. :flower:

Alec Baldwin charged with involuntary manslaughter over 'Rust' shooting


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GKstmoEvXPc

[arwen]

Yep, no surprises here:

Criminal charges against Alec Baldwin dropped in fatal ‘Rust’ shooting (https://nypost.com/2023/04/20/criminal-charges-against-alec-baldwin-dropped-in-fatal-rust-shooting/)

https://nypost.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2023/04/baldwin-evidence-017-1.jpg?resize=1024,682&quality=75&strip=all


Criminal charges against Alec Baldwin over the fatal shooting on the set of his movie “Rust” have been dropped, according to his lawyers.

Baldwin, 65, was charged with involuntary manslaughter over the Oct. 21, 2021 shooting of 42-year-old cinematographer Halyna Hutchins on the New Mexico set of the Western movie, after a prop pistol he was using for a scene unexpectedly fired a real bullet.

He pleaded not guilty to the charges, brought by the Santa Fe district attorney.

In a statement to The Post, Baldwin’s lawyers Luke Nikas and Alex Spiro said, “We are pleased with the decision to dismiss the case against Alec Baldwin and we encourage a proper investigation into the facts and circumstances of this tragic accident.”

“Rust” director Joel Souza was standing behind Hutchins viewing a camera angle as Baldwin rehearsed a scene in which he was to draw his revolver and point it at the camera when the tragic incident occurred.

And a day later, he is back on set, picking up where he left off:

Alec Baldwin seen in costume on new ‘Rust’ set for first time (https://nypost.com/2023/04/21/alec-baldwin-seen-in-costume-on-new-rust-set-for-first-time/?utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter&utm_campaign=nypost)

https://nypost.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2023/04/SPL5539307_033.jpg?resize=732,1024&quality=75&strip=all


Alec Baldwin was spotted in his Wild West wardrobe for the first time on the new “Rust” set after he fatally shot cinematographer Halyna Hutchins while rehearsing a scene for the same film in 2021.

Production for the indie-Western was halted after the on-set shooting in New Mexico on Oct. 21, 2021, but resumed this week near the Yellowstone Film Ranch in Paradise Valley, Montana.

A gray-bearded Baldwin was seen back in character as rugged gunslinger Harland Rust, wearing high leather boots, gray pants and shirt with a button-up black vest and a bandana around his neck.

[Kryztian]

Judge throws out Alec Baldwin manslaughter case
The charges stem from a 2021 fatal shooting accident on a film set
https://www.rt.com/pop-culture/600952-alec-baldwin-case-dismissed/

A New Mexico judge dismissed involuntary manslaughter charges against Hollywood A-lister Alec Baldwin on Friday, ruling that the prosecution has hid crucial evidence.

In October 21, 2021, Baldwin was rehearsing a scene on the set of the Western ‘Rust’ and fatally shot cinematographer Halyna Hutchins and wounded director Joel Souza using a revolver. Baldwin, who is one of the producers of the film, denied any wrongdoing, saying he had been falsely assured that the gun did not contain live rounds and that it was safe to use.

The prosecutors argued in court that Baldwin “violated the cardinal rules of firearm safety.” The actor’s defense team, meanwhile, described the incident as an “unspeakable tragedy,” but stressed that Baldwin “committed no crime” because live rounds were never supposed to be delivered on set, according to ABC News.

The defense team asked the court to dismiss the case, arguing that the prosecution failed to disclose that it had been given a batch of rounds when Baldwin’s lawyers requested a review of ballistic evidence. Judge Mary Marlowe Sommer agreed that it was a major flaw in the prosecution’s handling of the case.

“The state’s willful withholding of this information was intentional and deliberate,” Sommer said. “This disclosure over the course of trial is so late that it undermines the defense preparation for trial. There is no way for the court to right this wrong.”

The high-profile trial has brought attention to workplace safety across film sets and prompted discussions about the use of firearms during film production.

Hannah Gutierrez-Reed, the armorer on ‘Rust’, was sentenced to 18 months in prison in April. She was found guilty of involuntary manslaughter after loading Baldwin’s revolver with live ammunition.

[Satori]

I’ve got a feeling that the “wrong” the judge cannot “right” was something that Baldwin’s legal team already knew about. They must have followed very closely the armorer’s trial where she was convicted.

As I understand it, the ‘wrong” that cannot be righted is evidence, bullet casings, introduced at the armorer's trial that was not disclosed to Baldwin before his trial. I have to believe Baldwin’s legal team knew about that evidence and could have prepared for trial.

Nevertheless its was a good motion, whether his legal team was sandbagging or not. Any motion to dismiss that is granted is a good motion.

There is talk in New Mexico that the prosecutors, the investigators and others are in some trouble. Some of them resigned before the day was up.

[Hym]

Halyna ♥️

From the very beginning of this case, having a legal authority trying to assign responsibility for criminal neglect in the death of an above the line film worker misses the mark.....by a long shot. Even as all of my friends and fellow crew mates have been living thru the uncertainty of it all since Halyna left, the good thing is that the whole of this story has not been completely written, far from it...The prosecution of responsibility is not anywhere being addressed...yet....

I for one would not connect the sick social atmosphere of this states film union with such a lovely soul, but the value of her living and unnecessarily dying I do consider a call to completely clean out the film union here. I don't see that happening, even with what has recently hit the union hard at its core, until I think of her.....💜

No one in the media has answered the call to investigate beyond this single incident, though even to the untrained eye anyone could see that the accidental death did not occur in a vacuum. I have contacted many reporters with the experiences film workers have had for years that run contrary to any healthy working environment, let alone one supposedly bound by a comprehensive union charter and strict federal labor laws that protect the safety as well as the income of its workers. Now the union itself, for all practical purposes, does not exist. There is work, but it has no merited standing under the drained pall of receivership.

This is not a coincidence. The preventable on set death was the tip of the iceberg that has been melting for years....with no one answering the call to heal the workplace environments that caused this and many other tragedies, though most of the other tragedies tell the tales of rampant drug and alcohol abuse, marked by a shocking number of suicides, all abuses any real union should be held accountable for.

I know from the many friends I have in the union that I did not get hired by construction coordinators and some leads because I do not use drugs or drink alcohol, which in only one instance made me a valuable hire...me being someone looking out for the strays. In spite of those challenges I did work a lot of learning in and advance to run a few small coordinator gigs. Skill and compatibility do win out some times, but they are a detriment to working in f'k'ed up environments that should be run without all of the addicts and dealers making life and futures an unnecessary test of our endurance.

The mandated mRNA clot shots did cause deaths, along with the turbo cancers some union members are just too uninformed about to simply connect as being causal from the proven poisons within the shots, but those factors only predict the probable debilities that find course in a union of workers that can't really be called united....A union that isn't a union of like minded, like caring, likely responsible people.

The scamdemic "trial of compliance" was merely another magnifying glass overlay looking in on another group that needs a concerted community of healers doing their best healing. I do wonder why I write about a professional path so lost in its ways, then I remember the quality of some of those I know in those challenging and rewarding work environments. That's why. For those who remain.

I'll never work in that film union again, even though they haven't excommunicated me yet, after 4 1/2 yrs., which is another scam. Independent film, sure, and there are many present and former union friends who've told me that they'd work with and for me on an indie, all knowing just how we'd treat each other, have each others backs and enjoy the challenges that making worthwhile film calls us to create.

Yesterday there was a hearing to weigh a motion to dismiss the case against Gutierrez-Reid, the armorer, based upon the same grounds for the dismissal of the case against Baldwin. The dismissal was the court's determination of probable misconduct from the prosecutors who allegedly concealed a bag of ammunition from the attorneys who were involved in both cases.

The prosecutor in this case denies the allegation, citing that the evidence was available to both sets of defense attorneys, before she apparently determined that the same evidence was not exculpatory, as she asserts it would have not proven it was a live round from a bag or box of the live rounds that were loaded into the gun, causing the death of Halyna. Who knows where this will go?

It is obvious that the state dug deep into the details of most of the pertinent factors that led up to the loss of a beautiful life, including the drug use that was alleged to be common amongst some of the crew on set, which is a known habit among some, but not most of the members here in this state. However, the remaining details that allowed the atmosphere of negligence and lack of crew accountability for each others safety is just why I write here.

Only the film union itself can change the workplace dangers that, in any case, would have surely prevented that same tragedy. Many of us in the union warned them, but they didn't listen. The same goes for the union business agent, the onset safety officer, as well as the 1st AD. Even these facts do not tell me or anyone with experience in film just why the most important element in film set safety and health, including mental health, has not been discussed.

That missing critical factor is the relationship of everyone working on set, and in this case it is the silence of those who worked around and with the armorer who I know were either silent, for job security sake, or forgot that we each are guaranteed job protection, per union regulations, for the times like this when we need to yell out "Stop". I have taken away sets of car keys, returned on another day we can call sober. There are many examples of us doing that for each other.

The first thing we are told when entering most unions is that AT ANY TIME DURING PRODUCTION, SET BUILDING, OR WHEN STRIKING A SET we can stop any work by speaking up, when we see or perceive the possibility of anyone's safety being at risk. From the first day of apprentice work to the last day before retirement, this safety practice is LAW! It's a union law, and it's a law that every single union worker knows. I wonder just how many friends, if any, that the armorer had on set. The best of friends, when a coworker isn't listening to your speaking up, will make a loud noise....one way or the other, whatever it takes. In Hannah's case I wonder if anyone spoke up, and if so, did she listen.

I know it's real, this important safety law which is supposedly not bound by social convention or fear of reprisal. Just a few months in as a base construction grip on a t.v. series I spoke up and loudly said "No" to the orders of a foreman. To my surprise he asked me how we should safely take down a large standing wall, 14ft. x 5ft. weighing 400 to 500 lbs.. I showed another way, quite different than his order, and we did it that way. I wasn't reprimanded, just given a longer extension on the show, and a lot of quiet Thank You's from the crew. Of course, the foreman was from the 44 in L.A., so that was to be expected. Another story, another outcome if it was some New Mexico foreman.

This all is so much of the wrong "mental" work, that most who enjoy and get into their work do not have time for. When taken to excess, like the entire history of the union in this state, it results in not only injury and death, but loss of work, addiction, broken relationships and a trail of poorly aged people. It shouldn't be this way...but leaving is often the most healthy thing a New Mexico living, professional film worker can do to get on with life.

And now, whether it is a direct investigation by the international film union, or one of the many examples of corruption most in the union have survived or participated in, the New Mexico Film Union is in receivership. I do not know the cause of the trustees being appointed by the main office and the union president in New York, but I do hope that the deeper ills that plague the workers are faced and worked on, even if it is one of the many other legal reasons for shutting down the rights of union officers to do their duties. Who knows but for saving their own financially liable and socially exposed asses that a national and international union leadership steps in to put a state local union in protectorship?
I see it as an opportunity to correct a lot of wrongs. I hope they do too.

I do know that from the beginning, the very limited scope of the investigation by the media has been a disappointment to those who are and have been involved in the film industry, especially the film union in the state of New Mexico. Both political parties have done their best to hide the theft, the graft and the habitual grift that they all profit from. In this case there were and are more than enough ethical, principled and hard working union members around to take it all on. I've challenged the politicians before, but it has all fallen on deaf ears and dark hearts.

It's been 10 years since the death of assistant camera operator Sarah Jones while she was setting up a shot on an illegally used section of an active railroad track, filming the Allman Brothers biopic. I know the OSHA 10, union safety coordinator who lost his job by warning the director that the active railroad line did not give permission to use that track. He said that losing his job on that film was exactly why he was chosen by the production company, even though they did not head his warnings, much to his horror, noting that losing his job meant nothing when compared to Sarah's gruesome death and the injury of other crew members.

The only sticker I have ever put on my rolling, on-set toolbox was the one that read "S.O.S.", made in Sarah's memory. It not only meant "Save Our Set". It is remembered very personally by everyone as "Save Our Sarah", making the tragic loss of her life a LIVING MEMORY, a daily, conscious reminder of our responsibilities to each other. There weren't enough, if any of us at all, there on the set of Rust to at least put our voices and jobs to task for the safety that was never there. They call the industry Hollywood as if it was the Holy Place of a Living, Creative Force. It is really a forest of dead trees, projecting thru its virtual Hollow-wood, an ego fueled echo chamber where shallow and lost souls go to burn out and die, leaving the working ones to pick up the ashes and simply make a decent income.

Letting the Beautiful Halyna pass without seizing the opportunity to face the challenges that created the dangerous set she did her best to make magic on is the worst epitaph we could leave her.

[Bill Ryan]

Halyna ♥️

From the very beginning of this case, having a legal authority trying to assign responsibility for criminal neglect in the death of an above the line film worker misses the mark.....by a long shot. Even as all of my friends and fellow crew mates have been living thru the uncertainty of it all since Halyna left, the good thing is that the whole of this story has not been completely written, far from it...The prosecution of responsibility is not anywhere being addressed...yet....

I for one would not connect the sick social atmosphere of this states film union with such a lovely soul, but the value of her living and unnecessarily dying I do consider a call to completely clean out the film union here. I don't see that happening, even with what has recently hit the union hard at its core, until I think of her.....💜

No one in the media has answered the call to investigate beyond this single incident, though even to the untrained eye anyone could see that the accidental death did not occur in a vacuum. I have contacted many reporters with the experiences film workers have had for years that run contrary to any healthy working environment, let alone one supposedly bound by a comprehensive union charter and strict federal labor laws that protect the safety as well as the income of its workers. Now the union itself, for all practical purposes, does not exist. There is work, but it has no merited standing under the drained pall of receivership.

This is not a coincidence. The preventable on set death was the tip of the iceberg that has been melting for years....with no one answering the call to heal the workplace environments that caused this and many other tragedies, though most of the other tragedies tell the tales of rampant drug and alcohol abuse, marked by a shocking number of suicides, all abuses any real union should be held accountable for.

I know from the many friends I have in the union that I did not get hired by construction coordinators and some leads because I do not use drugs or drink alcohol, which in only one instance made me a valuable hire...me being someone looking out for the strays. In spite of those challenges I did work a lot of learning in and advance to run a few small coordinator gigs. Skill and compatibility do win out some times, but they are a detriment to working in f'k'ed up environments that should be run without all of the addicts and dealers making life and futures an unnecessary test of our endurance.

The mandated mRNA clot shots did cause deaths, along with the turbo cancers some union members are just too uninformed about to simply connect as being causal from the proven poisons within the shots, but those factors only predict the probable debilities that find course in a union of workers that can't really be called united....A union that isn't a union of like minded, like caring, likely responsible people.

The scamdemic "trial of compliance" was merely another magnifying glass overlay looking in on another group that needs a concerted community of healers doing their best healing. I do wonder why I write about a professional path so lost in its ways, then I remember the quality of some of those I know in those challenging and rewarding work environments. That's why. For those who remain.

I'll never work in that film union again, even though they haven't excommunicated me yet, after 4 1/2 yrs., which is another scam. Independent film, sure, and there are many present and former union friends who've told me that they'd work with and for me on an indie, all knowing just how we'd treat each other, have each others backs and enjoy the challenges that making worthwhile film calls us to create.

Yesterday there was a hearing to weigh a motion to dismiss the case against Gutierrez-Reid, the armorer, based upon the same grounds for the dismissal of the case against Baldwin. The dismissal was the court's determination of probable misconduct from the prosecutors who allegedly concealed a bag of ammunition from the attorneys who were involved in both cases.

The prosecutor in this case denies the allegation, citing that the evidence was available to both sets of defense attorneys, before she apparently determined that the same evidence was not exculpatory, as she asserts it would have not proven it was a live round from a bag or box of the live rounds that were loaded into the gun, causing the death of Halyna. Who knows where this will go?

It is obvious that the state dug deep into the details of most of the pertinent factors that led up to the loss of a beautiful life, including the drug use that was alleged to be common amongst some of the crew on set, which is a known habit among some, but not most of the members here in this state. However, the remaining details that allowed the atmosphere of negligence and lack of crew accountability for each others safety is just why I write here.

Only the film union itself can change the workplace dangers that, in any case, would have surely prevented that same tragedy. Many of us in the union warned them, but they didn't listen. The same goes for the union business agent, the onset safety officer, as well as the 1st AD. Even these facts do not tell me or anyone with experience in film just why the most important element in film set safety and health, including mental health, has not been discussed.

That missing critical factor is the relationship of everyone working on set, and in this case it is the silence of those who worked around and with the armorer who I know were either silent, for job security sake, or forgot that we each are guaranteed job protection, per union regulations, for the times like this when we need to yell out "Stop". I have taken away sets of car keys, returned on another day we can call sober. There are many examples of us doing that for each other.

The first thing we are told when entering most unions is that AT ANY TIME DURING PRODUCTION, SET BUILDING, OR WHEN STRIKING A SET we can stop any work by speaking up, when we see or perceive the possibility of anyone's safety being at risk. From the first day of apprentice work to the last day before retirement, this safety practice is LAW! It's a union law, and it's a law that every single union worker knows. I wonder just how many friends, if any, that the armorer had on set. The best of friends, when a coworker isn't listening to your speaking up, will make a loud noise....one way or the other, whatever it takes. In Hannah's case I wonder if anyone spoke up, and if so, did she listen.

I know it's real, this important safety law which is supposedly not bound by social convention or fear of reprisal. Just a few months in as a base construction grip on a t.v. series I spoke up and loudly said "No" to the orders of a foreman. To my surprise he asked me how we should safely take down a large standing wall, 14ft. x 5ft. weighing 400 to 500 lbs.. I showed another way, quite different than his order, and we did it that way. I wasn't reprimanded, just given a longer extension on the show, and a lot of quiet Thank You's from the crew. Of course, the foreman was from the 44 in L.A., so that was to be expected. Another story, another outcome if it was some New Mexico foreman.

This all is so much of the wrong "mental" work, that most who enjoy and get into their work do not have time for. When taken to excess, like the entire history of the union in this state, it results in not only injury and death, but loss of work, addiction, broken relationships and a trail of poorly aged people. It shouldn't be this way...but leaving is often the most healthy thing a New Mexico living, professional film worker can do to get on with life.

And now, whether it is a direct investigation by the international film union, or one of the many examples of corruption most in the union have survived or participated in, the New Mexico Film Union is in receivership. I do not know the cause of the trustees being appointed by the main office and the union president in New York, but I do hope that the deeper ills that plague the workers are faced and worked on, even if it is one of the many other legal reasons for shutting down the rights of union officers to do their duties. Who knows but for saving their own financially liable and socially exposed asses that a national and international union leadership steps in to put a state local union in protectorship?
I see it as an opportunity to correct a lot of wrongs. I hope they do too.

I do know that from the beginning, the very limited scope of the investigation by the media has been a disappointment to those who are and have been involved in the film industry, especially the film union in the state of New Mexico. Both political parties have done their best to hide the theft, the graft and the habitual grift that they all profit from. In this case there were and are more than enough ethical, principled and hard working union members around to take it all on. I've challenged the politicians before, but it has all fallen on deaf ears and dark hearts.

It's been 10 years since the death of assistant camera operator Sarah Jones while she was setting up a shot on an illegally used section of an active railroad track, filming the Allman Brothers biopic. I know the OSHA 10, union safety coordinator who lost his job by warning the director that the active railroad line did not give permission to use that track. He said that losing his job on that film was exactly why he was chosen by the production company, even though they did not head his warnings, much to his horror, noting that losing his job meant nothing when compared to Sarah's gruesome death and the injury of other crew members.

The only sticker I have ever put on my rolling, on-set toolbox was the one that read "S.O.S.", made in Sarah's memory. It not only meant "Save Our Set". It is remembered very personally by everyone as "Save Our Sarah", making the tragic loss of her life a LIVING MEMORY, a daily, conscious reminder of our responsibilities to each other. There weren't enough, if any of us at all, there on the set of Rust to at least put our voices and jobs to task for the safety that was never there. They call the industry Hollywood as if it was the Holy Place of a Living, Creative Force. It is really a forest of dead trees, projecting its virtual Hollow-wood, an ego fueled echo chamber where shallow and lost souls go to die.

Letting the Beautiful Halyna pass without seizing the opportunity to face the challenges that created the dangerous set she did her best to make magic on is the worst epitaph we could leave her.Many thanks indeed. :heart: And just one related question, because you may very well know much more about this than I do right now.

Do you think the 18 month prison sentence of the young rookie armorer (Hannah Gutierrez-Reed), was just or unjust? I have a fairly strong opinion about this, but was only following the case closely back in 2021, not at all up to speed with the many legal arguments that were made earlier this year.

:flower:

[Hym]

Thanks Bill, I appreciate You and the Forum living the example of open and even critical dialogue. Please do share your very strong opinion, here or by PM. It is very welcome.

Just or Unjust...Crime and Punishment are the measure of our humanities, often lost in things not based on true resolution and healing, let alone prevention of future injuries amongst the living.

In this case the criminal justice system had to take over because the armorer chose to take on way too much work, making it nearly impossible to ensure safety of those on set, which is the job of all armorers. Walk onto any set where the armorer, dutied to constant care of many firearms being used in so many scenes, is also working as an assistant prop master..... and you know that the production doesn't give a damn about anyones life there, even their own. To the point of my other posts, the fail safe protections, written into film union code, are not just the right of every single person on set. They are the duty of all.

In this state and it's hit and often miss application of justice I do not know where this will all end up. For every single professional in film here, its all up in the air whether the worthwhile changes will happen by a concerted effort of union members themselves, hopefully awakened by the actions of the international office, or if adjudication will run its filthy political head above the parapet and expose itself as the mop up crew for the crimes committed by those involved.

This one armorer shares the emotional and financial punishments that the producers and the glaring herd of elephants there, the union members themselves, all carry. The fact that the international president of the film union assigned qualified union trustees to take over the day to day duties of the New Mexico film union is proof of yet another responsibility denied, a reluctant duty turned into a reluctant malfeasance when applied far too late to be of any real consequence in the prevention of death and injury for those working in the industry. Justice delayed is not justice at all for those living and those loved souls lost.

In this case the only righteously responsible parties are the camera crew members, from the 600, who walked off set just before the shooting happened. THEY did the right thing by calling out the producers, the AD, and the invisible union safety officer for allowing all of the accidental discharge of weapons before the live fire death of the DP, Halyna Hutchins.

And that action by the camera crew was further validated as being necessary for their safety by the fact that the promises of the production to provide hotel accommodations nearby in Santa Fe were never met, which was a deliberate and dangerous 'cost saving' action taken for the benefit of the producers alone. That was a denial that added at least 2 hours of travel time for the workers to an already hurried production schedule that pushed the crew to work long and intense hours.

In this union it cannot be denied that the union does teach the vital, life saving attention to the dangers of traveling while exhausted because that has always been the cause of many accidents and deaths while working in film. However, there was only one group of professionals on set who remembered those facts. It was ONLY the camera crew who cared enough for themselves and the rest of the union members, the talent and the production there to risk being fired in order to do the right thing. That duty was never taken on by the AD, the assistant director, nor anyone else. Every production knows the dangers they get into when they overwork their crews and allow accidents to continue without being called out for the extremely personal threats to safety that they are.

The truth of Halynas loss is not something that we can judge in mere imprisonment of one person, or in any result of guaranteeing her son some future financial security. As it is now, Hannah, the former armorer, at the hearing in Santa Fe on Thursday, looked very different than the disheveled and lost person she was before and during trial, even during the dress up at sentencing. She's begun some process of deeply dealing with her situation, one that she alone knows, despite the fact that the legally recorded conversations she had while being detained before and during her trial gave the judge in this case cause to determine that she showed little care for her actions. Those conversations guaranteed her at least a minimum amount of time in jail.

If you have not yet done it I suggest watching any interview with Halyna. Look at pictures of her. Look at her face and you will know who she is, who she was. Such a very good person, a vibrant soul. You'd enjoy her company, not worrying about some felt need to adjust to some of the garbage that so many people carry around. It's so easy to see a purity of presence in her demeanor.....Looking at that great loss to her loved ones there will be no justice until the whole of the film industry here, and those who deliberately come here to engage and take advantage of its known weaknesses, are held to account.

In this armorers case, Hannah knew her actions were at fault from the first day she "allegedly" used awareness-altering substances and the first time she "allegedly" used live rounds in one of the pistols, even if fired off set, in off hours, which violates so many known protocols, so many armorers codes of conduct. Her punishment is for a lifetime, with or without being in prison.

She came on location at Bonanza Creek with an apprentices certificate in indulgence that only allowed her the right to work in a union atmosphere as F'k'ed up as the 480, the Local film union in NM.

Without experiencing the effects of the crew you are on, calling you out for the good work you do as well as for the seen and unseen mistakes you should be aware of, you are nowhere. Justice ticks for everyone close to the action there on that set, even those only within earshot of the action. I know this as fact because every one on set has some visceral reaction to the sound of discharging a weapon. It takes a lot of internal noise to deal with that on a conscious level, and sometimes that calming is acquired by using drugs or drinking.

Those who know me in the union do remember that I, along with a fair number of craftsfolk, consider that calling mistakes out is personal enough to have called myself out at an on set safety meeting, which was then and likely is now, a rare occurrence. I used my mistake, even tho it was following a nearby foremans order, as an opportunity to remind us all that we should follow our own intuition and understanding of safety to disregard the orders, even the suggestions, of those who direct us when we let those orders override our common sense, and I did just that. I both criticized and apologized to the foreman at the same time, but focused on my responsibilities irregardless of any order I was given.

If you want to know what this state is like look at the lawless disregard for safety where it is common that repeat drunk drivers have driving records with 10, 12, even 15 DWI's and where a few officers in charge of catching them are now being accused, with massive evidentiary proofs, of colluding with lawyers to dismiss drunk driving citations and arrests in exchange for the bribes, the hard, cold cash, the exchange of death for profit, a series of crimes that the overwhelming majority of peace officers in the state abhor. The proof of that fact is all of the videos we have seen of officers arresting other officers who drive under the influence.

In a state where the most prominent union is in receivership and not one media outlet has reported on that dire condition, whether on local broadcast news or in statewide newspapers, you get the real view that workers in this state are at the whim of political controllers and not any projected community concern for the lives of those employed in film here.

Most people in the country can't believe it, but it's written in the records of dismissed cases and the numbers of officers who were somehow, some way too busy to be there at those DUI arraignments, resulting in unethical, yet lawful, dismissal of most or all DUI charges. Being the ex-spouse of a former wife who was never charged with a drunk driving offense, even with a hospital recorded blood alcohol level of .31, almost 4 times the legal allowed limit, our son was never given the rightful experience of a court holding her to account, which would have been a just and meaningful chance at being ordered to at least attempt the sobriety that could have given them both some more years together as mother and son. The fact that my son's mother died 11 years earlier to the day that Halyna died will always be in my heart, if but for very different reasons.

This cannot be talked about without acknowledging the glaring condition of the film industry in this state, one that attracted the Rust producers to choosing this union and its morally paraplegic officers as the silent and complacent cohorts in a crime that kinetically involved them and their profits.

Hey Alec, did someone, did anyone, 'just take care of it'? You were the asswipe who was constantly firing on set, who somehow forgot all of those decades of shoots you were on and any accidents that happened from lax attention to safety. Who should know more than you about safety besides the armorer? I won't take any more time than that, because you know why you picked this state in its condition back then, and even now, to allow or not allow the armorer to save the production money by her taking on the added task of being an assistant prop master, while being an armorer on such an excessively active-fire set, something any smart armorer would never do, nor even a profit focussed producer would ever allow. NEVER.

Your financial advisor, you, the producers and any other investor, risked and lost the bet that a catastrophe would not happen, endangering your bottom line. Saying now that you regret the loss of life, which you do, is a shallow admonition when we know that the production took on that unnecessary risk to save a few bucks. Halynas life was not yours to risk, being in the position you took on as an on set producer. Her life was yours to protect, just as all of our lives are there for each other to respect and take personal care of. All other explanations in the matter are B.S..

I have insulted producers while talking about the monetary value, the profit protection needed to keep productions safe, which is something that I should never have had to do. I have not argued with producers or directors about safety because it is not a subject to be considered as negotiable, especially when looking at any profit margins. We know that the production didn't care about the safety of crew members or of anyone on that set, regardless of them being above or below the line. Bullets and props don't discriminate when they are let loose. They are a threat to everyone on set when they are in the hands of irresponsible people, just as they are everywhere, on set or off....in the world that is also as real as the bullet that took Halynas life.

I'm glad that most working construction professionals on set don't have or ever expect, nor want, to have any personal communications with the talent, the actors on set. The rare interactions I've had have always been appreciated, but they are only footnotes in our experiences with each other and the works we do. My memory of working my first 17 hour day as a 2nd unit coordinator was just how well we all clicked.

That and getting our on-location medic off of the ladder from the stakebed truck, as we were taking our sign off of a restaurant roof, because we need him to always be safe in case one of us got injured. I couldn't blame him for wanting to jump in because camaraderie when it clicks, by constantly facing and solving location challenges, is infectious, even at 9 p.m., 15 hours after we started our work day. Our contact with each other as professional, skilled workers, is very personal, as personal as all of those embedded and protected rights of union workers can be, when considering speaking the F'k Up about safety.


Look at Halynas face and remember that this woman was also an investigative reporter who valued the lives and conditions of those she was not responsible for. But we all know better than that. She and I, Us, We are as responsible as much as we know we have the capacity to engage and bring to light the suffering of others. Honoring her will be found in the healing of a union and not by some sticker imagined in her memory that hasn't yet earned the right to claim some lost justice on her behalf.

[Hym]

On September 30, 2024 the armorer on the "Rust" movie was denied her request for a new trial.
This report by Winston Cho of The Hollywood Reporter is the best summary of the ongoing court proceeding and their impact on the lives of those involved:

https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/general-news/rust-armorer-loses-bid-dismissal-charges-1236017943/

In conclusion the judge in the case, Mary Marlowe Sommer, summed it up best by addressing the armorers actions:

“In her own words, she’s said she didn’t need to be shaking dummies (dummy rounds) all the time,” Sommer said. She stressed, “You were the armorer, the one that stood between a safe weapon and a weapon that could kill someone. You alone turned a safe weapon into a lethal weapon. But for you, Ms. Hutchins would be alive, a husband would have his partner and a little boy would have his mother.”

What the state of New Mexico did not address is JUST why the film union in the state allowed such an extreme atmosphere of danger to be so commonplace on that set, that filming location, let alone all of the unreported and unpublicized, unsafe conditions that those of us in the union have survived.

By the time that the criminal justice system is involved, all we know for sure is that the union failed in its duties to prevent the death and injuries we now know as "Rust", which is an accurate description of the union itself, "Rusted". By the time that OSHA, the national safety administration, and the state safety office intervened by issuing any fine or suspension laid upon the production itself, all on site workers view those fines as another written and paid failure of the union itself. Most expect little to change.

Prevention is simple to understand. When a set of workers agrees to stop production in its tracks, safety steps in. I have seen crews walk off of sets and in so doing push producers and directors to slow production down to have a real safety meeting.

The worst productions, the most deceitful line producers, the self-entitled investors, those producers investing soley for profit, can only be pushed to respect the safety of everyone on set when their bottom line is affected. That is maybe the only real power of a group of people who care enough about each others safety and thus longevity in a career, especially any group of professionals who call themselves a union.

2nd unit coordinators who strive to be as efficient and as timely as possible, know well how much any delay in the schedule can cost a production. Our focus is still on safety, if only to a productions bottom line in their eyes because, to that bottom line, injuries often delay filming and often predict future, more serious injuries and deaths when not immediately addressed, and in the best of conditions prevented.

All responsible union members who do care, and those who are duty bound to prevent foreseeable dangers, for the most part do their best to keep the resolution of those cases in house and prefer them not to be publicized, not to hide the dangers from public view, but to resolve the conditions that created the dangers in the first place. The exercise of publicizing something that can be internally resolved is probably a political move with ulterior motives, moves not connected to preventing further injuries. In this case any publicity is due to preventing further danger to union workers, an exposure that may or may not help solve the deeper ills that exist in a very sick union.

When, as in this glaring case of the irresponsibilities and negligences of many union members that cannot be laid upon productions themselves, the unresolved dangers end up in death and injury, the public exposure should produce actions by the responsible parties to prevent further tragedies. In this case so far, any of the public admonitions by the film union acknowledging responsibilities for the unsafe on-location conditions have been weak and shallow.


This next series of notes details what many of us, if not all of us present and former film union members, know to be matters that created the unsafe working conditions in the union:

Regarding the decades long history of this one union and being further to the point, the blacklisting of qualified, responsible, compatible professionals, an abuse so common in the film union in the state of New Mexico, goes hand in hand with the general atmosphere of unsafe, dangerous working conditions. They are inseparable. It seems that The State of New Mexico alone has the ability to add any solid, positive and legal change to this union.

The best step would be in forcing the union to actually be a HIRING HALL, as its members are told to list it when filling out unemployment forms. This actionable step would be a valuable and effective way to keep so many good, ethical and safety conscious union members employed, at least the ones who haven't yet left. I've said before that any newspaper asking for replies from former union members, listing their specific reasons for leaving the film union in this state, would likely gather replies in the hundreds, maybe even in the thousands. It would be as fact based a document as opening up the film unions books from the date of its certification, likely identifying a majority of the discriminations against the qualified and experienced union members who more often than not lost their careers to that deep seated corruption.

AS it now stands the union has used apprentice hires to ostensibly remove those union members who they have "problems" with, problems that most often involve those union members who are the most safety aware, which means they are the ones who face problems and work to resolve them. Of course many of those problems also involve discriminating against those who do not cater to the whims of higher ups, a condition that also caters to nepotism and allows abuse on so many levels. Those apprentice hires, from a so-called "overflow list", are only supposed to be hired when all other experienced, available union members are either already hired or otherwise unavailable. That has never been the case, for a very long time, if it ever was.

Talking to union members from other states, this New Mexico "condition" (of forced, unlawful compliance) is hard for them to believe, as similar conditions are not accepted by union members in other states.


That union lies when it calls itself a "hiring hall" when apprentices, with much less incentive to object to unreasonable and unsafe, discriminatory practices, are hired before those with experience who are supposed to be listed as available. Although the union claimed to have a list of available, experienced workers to be presented to productions I don't know a single union member who was contacted from that imaginary list. I do know that in a real union those Available lists exist because I was on one of those lists when I was in another unrelated union in another state, where I too waited in line as an apprentice before I was hired, and as time went on I was chosen from that list based upon availability and experience alone, which is the exact legal and fair employment reason for their use.

In the extremes of the recent illegal, unconstitutional and unhealthy mandates, imposed by what I consider to be a collusion between the film union and the producers guild's 2021 agreement, the malfeasance is even worse. These last four years have been a very well programmed attack on workers rights, abuses that the union and productions have taken full advantage of.

In the constant vigilance necessary to retain our rights, especially those temporarily removed, there are many opportunities now available to be addressed and resolved. Is this union going to step up to its opportunities and do some real work? That too is up in the air with the October Balloons. At least they are enjoyable.

If citizens in New Mexico were to be honest to newly arriving residents they would put up 'Welcome to Our State' signs that have the added and very helpful lines saying "Do You Have an Attorney? If not, Get One, Now. Integrity is not protected here.", and "New Mexico. It's not New, and it certainly isn't Mexico. Prepare accordingly", as well as the obvious, "Enjoy the Beautiful Skies and the Fall Balloon Festival".



An Addendum and Prognosis of The Future of Film In New Mexico...

Hidden in the almost unrestricted movements of film equipment and film workers there lives a dirty underworld that does have something to do with just why the rights of film workers are often disregarded and may be at further peril in the near future.

I even bring this up because of how far removed from accountability film productions have been in this state. Unions effectively removed workers who unions should have been prosecuted by the State of New Mexico for removing. I don't doubt that the same group, the same industry would have any qualms at all about somehow turning a group of immigrants into dues paying members, new dues paying members who would be even less motivated than native born union apprentices to speak up about inequality and unsafe working conditions.

Getting to some of the further hidden agendas of why and how film sets and their finances are run, I was told experiences from drivers about the activities, but have no experience of nor proof of, some series and movies being fronts for money laundering from every illegal criminal activity available, like all of the present u.s. gov't, NGO and foreign cartel collusions that have been used to move millions of illegal aliens into the country, many times more now since Jan.20, 2021 than ever before.

It will be of note to see just how unions deal with the influx of those possible, future film workers here in the states. In the midst of most of those obviously illegal immigrants there lives a preponderance of mostly hard working, moral and hopeful people escaping poverty and abuse.

Irregardless of the deep and karmic truths that this country is now reaping, which are the natural outcome of all of those decades and centuries of lost wars that are the consequences of murderous, abusive and genocidal colonial activities taken against foreign citizens.........

........the difference now within the absorption and reconciliations of those people should be our reminder that we are always bound to treat those people with the best of our compassion, just as readily as we remove the criminals and military infiltrators invited in by the present governmental and corporate cartels. The best of our actions, of our lived intentions, will take momentous planning and massive concentrations of human resources to vet those now in the country that we would have otherwise wanted in, without being abusive.

In this case the deliberate acrimony, programmed against those many who came for freedom and opportunity alone, offers little room for compassion and understanding, yet not just from the profiteers, including those present in the film industry. Just as well, all of the promises made to immediately deport the illegal immigrants will be our biggest opportunity to take such actions, against those who have already suffered in their own homelands, and who then have suffered great abuses transiting into our country, with a great deal of compassion, however that turns out to the best of our abilities....and I am clueless how those measures will turn out.

We as a people are much more complicit in the way many of those countries abused their people than we have yet to honestly come to terms with.

Well, the days of reckoning are at hand. One way or the other the measure of our own humanities is being found or lost.........