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

[Pam]

Posted by waves (here)
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:

[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]

Posted by waves (here)
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:

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=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/art...arms-shot.html

[Gracy]

Posted by scotslad (here)
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

Posted by scotslad (here)
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

"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/2021/1...arent-mistake/



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!

Posted by Satori (here)
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]

Posted by Satori (here)
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 than 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]

Posted by Bill Ryan (here)

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

[Satori]

Posted by Bill Ryan (here)

Posted by Satori (here)
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 than 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]

Posted by TomKat (here)
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" ???

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

[Satori]

Posted by TargeT (here)
Guess who was responsible for the gun...........

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

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/new...edgdhp&pc=U531


It's all political:


https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/in...edgdhp&pc=U531

[TargeT]

Posted by Satori (here)

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/new...edgdhp&pc=U531


It's all political:


https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/in...edgdhp&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]

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

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...fired-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

[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/sho...=1#post1459294