Grand jury in New Mexico charged the actor for a shooting on Rust set that killed cinematographer Halyna Hutchins

Actor Alec Baldwin is facing a new involuntary manslaughter charge over the 2021 fatal shooting of a cinematographer on the set of the movie Rust.

A Santa Fe, New Mexico, grand jury indicted Baldwin on Friday, months after prosecutors had dismissed the same criminal charge against him.

During an October 2021 rehearsal on the set of Rust, a western drama, Baldwin was pointing a gun at cinematographer Halyna Hutchins when it went off, fatally striking her and wounding Joel Souza, the film’s director.

Baldwin, a co-producer and star of the film, has said he did not pull the trigger, but pulled back the hammer of the gun before it fired.

Last April, special prosecutors dismissed the involuntary manslaughter charge against Baldwin, saying the firearm might have been modified prior to the shooting and malfunctioned and that forensic analysis was warranted. But in August, prosecutors said they were considering re-filing the charges after a new analysis of the weapon was completed.

You are viewing a single thread.
View all comments
15 points

He hired the cheapest firearms manager, tolerated crew playing with real bullets, and so when he’s handed a loaded gun, it’s a direct result of his own mistakes.

permalink
report
reply
140 points
*

Lowest bidder aside, how is this clearly not the armorer’s fault front and center? It was her responsibility to handle the set props. What Baldwin paid them is irrelevant to what she claimed she could provide and was obligated to provide under contract.

She is literally the one to (a) claim the firearm was safe, but (b) load it with live ammunition.

???

permalink
report
parent
reply
106 points
*

Work in the industry, doc side but this is pretty basic producer stuff. This is 100% on the armorer and the only reason they keep trying to charge Baldwin is the legal grey area of the state they filmed in. Had this happened in a state with more production (Georgia, Louisiana, California) there would be a more direct way for prosecutors to go after the correct person. Georgia and California specifically has legal precedent from deaths on set like this.

One of the reasons credits are so long is because we hire people to maintain a safe set - think of it like a foreman for safe worksite in construction (which we also hire often). We hire a ton of people for safety from actual police to medics and rescue personnel.

Hiring an armorer is SPECIFICALLY to avoid situations like this. Because the production company is like “hey you know what? I don’t think me, some producer knows how to use a gun safely, I should hire someone who’s certified to do that.” It’s not some token job, they’re supposed to be trained on how to properly load the powder of the blank rounds, how to mark and flag hot guns and dead props, and pretty fucking much rule #1A is never bring live ammo anywhere near your set.

Baldwin should not be held criminally liable and any half decent entertainment lawyer will settle that. Now civil liability, that’s certainly more realistic. But even then it should be the production LLC not any 1 person.

permalink
report
parent
reply
8 points

In your experience, have you ever seen the responsibility of set prop safety fall on the producer and not be delegated to someone else? Based on what you write here, I assume not which would confirm my initial belief.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-36 points

This is 100% on the armorer

… Except for one other guy taking a gun he knew nothing about, pointing it at a person and pulling the trigger.

No, I think they are both guilty. Obviously not equally.

If the common judicial practice is different - then maybe some day there’ll be a new precedent.

permalink
report
parent
reply
19 points

An article I read right after this happened (which very well could have been a hit piece) said she (the armorer) was in her early 20s and would fuck around and go shooting with the prop guns when filming wasn’t happening. So… kind of. Yes

Sounds like there’s lots of blame to go around

permalink
report
parent
reply
9 points

She’s guilty, he probably has some liability being the producer.

permalink
report
parent
reply
30 points
*

He was far from the only producer. Quite frankly I doubt very much he did any real work besides acting.

The liability belongs to the company as a whole, absent some slam dunk of a memo where Baldwin personally said “Hire this lady, she’s my cousin’s kid, also I personally know she falsified her credentials but fuck it.”

permalink
report
parent
reply
7 points

It’s essentially a question of “who’s in charge around here and whose ass will be on the line?” Nearest example I can think of is if your boss tells you to deliver something and you get into a car accident, your work covers you with their insurance (USA!)

Even more concisely summed up with an incredibly apropos phrase, “if you give a monkey a gun, you don’t get to blame the monkey when someone gets shot.”

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

It is, but groveling, weak sycophants hate Baldwin for mocking their traitor god.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-19 points
*

One of the biggest rules of gun safety is treat every gun as if it’s loaded even when as far as you know it isn’t. Regardless of how you think the ratio of culpability falls or who should be held legally accountable, he is at least partially responsible because he was the person holding the gun and aiming it at someone.

permalink
report
parent
reply
34 points

That’s rule number one on the shooting range, It’s not quite the same in film or on stage.

In those cases, actors have to trust their prop master or armorer.

Those are the people specifically hired to make sure the gun or the bullets are fake.

Baldwin was handed a gun, and specifically told that it was cold. The person handing it over even called out for the entire set that it was a cold weapon. The director then immediately called places. Because that’s how it works.

But the gun was not cold.

Now, the person whose job it was to maintain those weapons was incompetent. Baldwin didn’t hire her, he didn’t hire anyone. He was one of 10 producers and mostly handled fundraising and script changes.

But he made fun of Trump a few times, and was involved in a gun death in a Trump friendly area. In California the armorer would be facing these charges, and would have faced them as soon as the initial investigation was over, not several years later.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-36 points

Rule 1 of gun safety, check the gun you’re handed for any ammunition.

What else needs to be said?

Everything else is its own issue to be dealt with.

He was given a firearm, did not do HIS due dilligence by checking the gun. He killed a fucking human being. . End of story

permalink
report
parent
reply
22 points
*

Can’t really expect that any more than you expect that Macaulay Culkin in Home Alone personally made sure the paint buckets he swung at Joe Pesci were actually empty. It’s just not how it works.

It’s up to the props people, in this case the armorer.

permalink
report
parent
reply
18 points

I honestly would not expect a bunch of Californian actors to know that. You’re often not dealing with a crowd of people who grew up hunting or at the range. You’re dealing with people who hire an armorer to bring that expertise to the set.

permalink
report
parent
reply
14 points

The rules of firearm safety apply when your buddy is showing off his new canik, not when you’re a professional on a movie set. A million other actors have ignored those rules on a million other sets, and it’s typically perfectly safe because the armorers know what they’re doing, and the crew isn’t bringing live rounds on set.

permalink
report
parent
reply
7 points

I mean… by this metric Michael Massee should have done time for shooting Brandon Lee during the filming of The Crow.

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points

Yeah, the director and editors are gonna love you making sure your props are cleared every single shoot.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-51 points

He is the producer.

Hi hired her. He tolerated crew using real bullets on set for playing target practice during down time.

The boss created unsafe conditions, and killed his employee through negligence.

permalink
report
parent
reply
51 points
*

I find that to be a pretty big leap. When she took the role of armorer she assumed all responsibility on set to ensure the safety of the crew, which was the entire point in Baldwin hiring someone to that position in the first place. Her gross negligence if not outright fraud is a result of her own actions and nobody else.

At most I’d give 20% responsibility to Baldwin for not examining her background more closely.

permalink
report
parent
reply
14 points

Baldwin was one of 10 producers and was not the hiring director. He, in fact, hire her.

I’ve heard that there were live fire practices on set, but could never back that up.

What I did find the last time this came up was a write-up about how there were reloads intermixed with the dummy rounds, re-loads that had been used on a completely different film shoot, where the actors of that film were walked tough some target practice with live rounds, so that they would better understand how a gun firing live rounds would kick.

Then a coffee can full of mixed live and dummy rounds ended up kicking around for a couple of years before being sent out to the Rust filming location, and the armorer didn’t know how to check the bullets. Or didn’t know that she had to. She was told that everything sent was a dummy round.

There were a bunch of live rounds found mixed into props, including Baldwin’s ammo belt.

All of them looked like the standard dummy round.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-1 points

real bullets. . .
playing . . .

That’s fucked up.
I find it very hard to understand the attitudes some people have towards firearms.

permalink
report
parent
reply
65 points

The thing is, he’s not the one who hired her.

He was one of 10 listed producers on that film, and was not the hiring director.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-70 points

He’s the one who just took a gun laying nearby (without asking anyone about it being normal), jokingly pointed it at a person and squeezed the trigger.

People defending him seem to think that “criminal stupidity” is not a thing.

permalink
report
parent
reply
45 points

This is not accurate. At.all. it’s really funny how much stuff gets repeated online without any evidence. Social media is just one big game of telephone

permalink
report
parent
reply
29 points

I would love to see a source on that story, because it sounds super made up

permalink
report
parent
reply
25 points

Thats not what happened at all. He was handed a gun and told it was safe.

permalink
report
parent
reply
15 points

Um no. That’s a blatant lie.

He was handed a gun, and told it was cold.

According to a search warrant, the guns were briefly checked by armorer Gutierrez-Reed, before assistant director Halls took the Pietta revolver from the prop cart and handed it to Baldwin.[38][39] In a subsequent affidavit, Halls said the safety protocol regarding this firearm was such that Halls would open the loading gate of the revolver and rotate the cylinder to expose the chambers so he could inspect them himself. According to the affidavit, Halls said he did not check all cylinder chambers, but he recalled seeing three rounds in the cylinder at the time. (After the shooting, Halls said in the affidavit, Gutierrez-Reed retrieved the weapon and opened it, and Halls said that he saw four rounds which were plainly blanks, and one which could have been the remaining shell of a discharged live round.)[40] In the warrant, it is further stated that Halls announced the term “cold gun”, meaning that it was empty.[38] Halls’s lawyer, Lisa Torraco, later sought to assert that he did not take the gun off the cart and hand it to Baldwin as reported, but when pressed by a reporter to be clear, she refused to repeat that assertion.[41]

People attacking him just make shit up left and right.

permalink
report
parent
reply
19 points

Do you know his involvement in her being hired? Being a producer can mean anything from total involvement to it just being a name on paper.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point
Deleted by creator
permalink
report
parent
reply
-18 points

If he’s not lying about not pulling the trigger, then he, or the firearms manager, also bought a dangerously cheap gun.

The whole thing was a cascading failure, imho, with Baldwin at the end of it, making him no less culpable than anyone before him. Ultimately, “I didn’t know the gun was loaded” is never an excuse.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

It wasn’t necessarily cheap. It was just a double action revolver.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

All of the downvotes are from right wingers brigading.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-20 points
*

All that is why he is civilly liable for her wrongful death.

The reason he is criminally liable is because, without bothering to check that the weapon was safe, he elected to point it at a woman and pull the trigger…

If he had blown through a stop sign without bothering to check that the crossroad had been closed, he would be criminally liable for the damages he caused. The fact that cameras were rolling when he did it would not excuse him of his dangerous act.

He failed to take the basic safety precautions expected of anyone handling a firearm, and he failed to introduce alternative measures for achieving the same degree of safety.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-21 points

And then tried to blame any and everyone but himself afterwards.

permalink
report
parent
reply

News

!news@lemmy.world

Create post

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil

Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.

Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.

Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.

Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.

Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.

No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.

If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.

Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.

The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body

For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

Community stats

  • 14K

    Monthly active users

  • 23K

    Posts

  • 581K

    Comments