Alec Baldwin Fatally Shoots Crewmember on Film Set

[Babe Ruth]

Movies have armorers on-set. Armorers are in charge of maintaining the firearms the actors use. Responsibility for the make up of the guns ends at them...

Rob, can you cite the New Mexico law that states this legal responsibility falling solely on armorers, not the shooter(?) Because I haven't seen anything where this is codified (I ended up looking at NM's legal definitions/conditions for manslaughter yesterday). Or cite NM law where the professional expectations of an armorer somehow supercede New Mexico's otherwise manslaughter threshold?.. which was my original question.. Does the state of New Mexico have some kind of set of laws unique to movie sets. And I didn't see any, so it doesn't seem like the state lacks legal grounds to charge Baldwin with manslaughter.. it's more likely they lack the desire/will. Or the DA just thinks it would be unjust to prosecute Baldwin considering all the circumstances.

This scenario does feel like a potential loophole for people who would deliberately plot a killing on a movie set tho..

 

[Golden_Jet]

This is the crux of the issue from my perspective..
Do movie sets in New Mexico receive a unique legal dispensation when handling firearms? If someone knows, please advise..

Because it seems like a legally irrelevant defense for a shooter (in this case Baldwin) to say he didn't know the gun held live rounds.
Many years ago a kid in my neighborhood shot a guest at his house party and killed her. Basically everybody at the party ended up testifying the shooter had no malice, and he didn't realize there was a bullet in the chamber. But he was still charged, and convicted of manslaughter. This wasn't NM, so I'm wondering do movie sets have some extralegal standards? Because otherwise who cares if the defense lawyers claim it was the armorers professional responsibility.. the shooter usually has his/her own legal culpability for firing the gun.. where New Mexico is proceeding like a movie set frees you from that normal standard of individual responsibility?

Lol, I’m sure the kid didnt have someone in charge of the guns, that’s there to verify the guns not loaded with live rounds.

 

[DaaaaB's]

Rob, can you cite the New Mexico law that states this legal responsibility falling solely on armorers, not the shooter(?) Because I haven't seen anything where this is codified (I ended up looking at NM's legal definitions/conditions for manslaughter yesterday). Or cite NM law where the professional expectations of an armorer somehow supercede New Mexico's otherwise manslaughter threshold?.. which was my original question.. Does the state of New Mexico have some kind of set of laws unique to movie sets. And I didn't see any, so it doesn't seem like the state lacks legal grounds to charge Baldwin with manslaughter.. it's more likely they lack the desire/will. Or the DA just thinks it would be unjust to prosecute Baldwin considering all the circumstances.

This scenario does feel like a potential loophole for people who would deliberately plot a killing on a movie set tho..

You're grasping at straws here by comparing apples to oranges.

 

[Troy McClure]

Rob, can you cite the New Mexico law that states this legal responsibility falling solely on armorers, not the shooter(?) Because I haven't seen anything where this is codified (I ended up looking at NM's legal definitions/conditions for manslaughter yesterday). Or cite NM law where the professional expectations of an armorer somehow supercede New Mexico's otherwise manslaughter threshold?.. which was my original question.. Does the state of New Mexico have some kind of set of laws unique to movie sets. And I didn't see any, so it doesn't seem like the state lacks legal grounds to charge Baldwin with manslaughter.. it's more likely they lack the desire/will. Or the DA just thinks it would be unjust to prosecute Baldwin considering all the circumstances.

This scenario does feel like a potential loophole for people who would deliberately plot a killing on a movie set tho..

There is no loophole. If someone wanted to use a gunshot scene in a movie to kill someone else, then the person who snuck in the live round is the killer. New Mexico doesn't have any law specific to movie sets because none is needed. Our legal system deals with this kind of stuff all the time.

No different than if I cut the breaks on someone's car causing the car to run over and kill a pedestrian. The driver isn't going to be charged with homicide, but I would because I set in motion the act I knew was likely to get someone killed.

Or if some vindictive nurse secretly swaps out a syringe another nurse was going to use to replace medication with poison to kill a patient. The nurse who was tricked into injecting poison isn't going to be treated as the killer.

Now, these aren't completely clear examples. If someone crawled out from under my car, flipped me the bird, and said they cut my breaks, then I'm not the same kind of innocent if I still get in and drive away. Same if the injecting nurse sees the syringe is full of something that's clearly the wrong color from what should be injected and proceeds, then the nurse is going to get in a lot of trouble.

 

[Filthy Dangles]

Alec Baldwin to be recharged with involuntary manslaughter in Rust shooting​

New Mexico prosecutors intend to recharge actor Alec Baldwin with involuntary manslaughter in connection with the fatal 2021 Rust shooting, NBC News reported on Tuesday, citing two sources familiar with the matter.

Baldwin’s case will be brought before a grand jury in mid-November, the report added.


Kari Morrissey, a special prosecutor on the case, and a lawyer representing Baldwin both did not immediately respond to requests for comment from Reuters.

Baldwin was originally charged with involuntary manslaughter for the death of cinematographer Halyna Hutchins in October 2021. She died when a revolver Baldwin was rehearsing with fired a live round that passed through her and injured director Joel Souza.

Baldwin has said he is not responsible for Hutchins’ death and he did not pull the trigger.

Prosecutors dismissed charges against Baldwin in April after new evidence emerged that the gun he used may have been modified, allowing it to fire without the trigger being pulled.

Morrissey said at the time that if new testing of the gun showed it was working they would recharge Baldwin.

Subsequent testing of the gun by an independent expert showed it would not fire unless the trigger was pulled, confirming previous FBI testing on the reproduction long Colt .45 revolver.

 

[sdf]

the best shooter in the civilized west

 

[John Price]

good. he fired the shot that killed her. take responsibility instead of hiding behind rich lawyers

 

[SmytheKing]

good. he fired the shot that killed her. take responsibility instead of hiding behind rich lawyers

You seem awfully personally invested in a situation that's clearly an accident that he wasn't in control of. Can't imagine why you'd want a guy thrown in prison for firing a gun that shouldn't have had live rounds in it that he didn't load. I'm sure it's a very lucid and fair reason though and not based on anything other than the facts of the case.

 

[John Price]

You seem awfully personally invested in a situation that's clearly an accident that he wasn't in control of. Can't imagine why you'd want a guy thrown in prison for firing a gun that shouldn't have had live rounds in it that he didn't load. I'm sure it's a very lucid and fair reason though and not based on anything other than the facts of the case.

oh no it was an accident that's why they're prosecuting him all over again.

guy's a jagoff and cried on 20/20 about how "it wasn't me I didn't kill her" well who had the gun

"I DIDN'T KNOW IT WAS LOADED! I SWEAR!"

f*** him, he murdered someone. shouldn't murderers go to jail?

yeah you're right. it's not only this case. guy has a history of being a jerk. Remember his phone call where he called his daughter a rude thoughtless pig?

rot in jail alec

 

[Filthy Dangles]

rot in jail alec

the odds of him doing any substantial time in jail for this are like 1 in a million.

 

[Kiwi]

You seem awfully personally invested in a situation that's clearly an accident that he wasn't in control of. Can't imagine why you'd want a guy thrown in prison for firing a gun that shouldn't have had live rounds in it that he didn't load. I'm sure it's a very lucid and fair reason though and not based on anything other than the facts of the case.

Doesn't matter, he fired the shot that killed her and anybody who's ever had any gun safety training knows its incumbent on the person in possession of the firearm to check and verify not just take somebody's word the gun isn't dangerous

the odds of him doing any substantial time in jail for this are like 1 in a million.

Zero chance he does anything substantial
At worst he pleas down to bugger all imo

 

[Babe Ruth]

Doesn't matter, he fired the shot that killed her and anybody who's ever had any gun safety training knows its incumbent on the person in possession of the firearm to check and verify not just take somebody's word the gun isn't loaded..

Yup.. good post.
And the known details of this case easily fit New Mexico's definition of involuntary manslaughter. (I recently checked).

Even if Baldwin acted with no malice, he did kill a woman and it was "reckless" to point and fire a gun at another person, without verifying if it was loaded with a live round.
The explanation of the amorer's negligence will make for a good defense for Baldwin. But an involuntary manslaughter charge seems appropriate. Guess we'll see..

 

[Filthy Dangles]

Doesn't matter, he fired the shot that killed her and anybody who's ever had any gun safety training knows its incumbent on the person in possession of the firearm to check and verify not just take somebody's word the gun isn't dangerous

This is true in the 'real world' i.e not a movie set involving an actor who was told the gun was cold. Alec Baldin likely doesn't know shit about firearms either or how to even check if a gun is safe. Hence why they have an armorer and other people who handle that stuff.

Yup.. good post.
And the known details of this case easily fit New Mexico's definition of involuntary manslaughter. (I recently checked).

Even if Baldwin acted with no malice, he did kill a woman and it was "reckless" to point and fire a gun at another person, without verifying if it was loaded with a live round.
The explanation of the amorer's negligence will make for a good defense for Baldwin. But an involuntary manslaughter charge seems appropriate. Guess we'll see..

New Mexico Statutes Chapter 30. Criminal Offenses § 30-2-3. Manslaughter
B. Involuntary manslaughter consists of manslaughter committed in the commission of an unlawful act not amounting to felony, or in the commission of a lawful act which might produce death in an unlawful manner or without due caution and circumspection.

He obviously wasn't already committing an unlawful act (i.e drunk driving, fleeing from police) when the kiling happened. So it comes down to if you think he acted so recklessly that he commited manslauther.

I just can't see it. Most people feel the same way, it's a waste of time by the prosecution. The only people who think there's anything there or want to see Baldiwn burn have something personal against him, likely driven by politics.

 

[Kiwi]

This is true in the 'real world' i.e not a movie set involving an actor who was told the gun was cold. Alec Baldin likely doesn't know shit about firearms either or how to even check if a gun is safe. Hence why they have an armorer and other people who handle that stuff.



New Mexico Statutes Chapter 30. Criminal Offenses § 30-2-3. Manslaughter
B. Involuntary manslaughter consists of manslaughter committed in the commission of an unlawful act not amounting to felony, or in the commission of a lawful act which might produce death in an unlawful manner or without due caution and circumspection.

He obviously wasn't already committing an unlawful act (i.e drunk driving, fleeing from police) when the kiling happened. So it comes down to if you think he acted so recklessly that he commited manslauther.

I just can't see it. Most people feel the same way, it's a waste of time by the prosecution. The only people who think there's anything there or want to see Baldiwn burn have something personal against him, likely driven by politics.

Which is why you should Crack that firearm open and both you and the expert verify together that weapon isn't loaded or is "sate"

It's tough on the inexperienced person because they know very little but in my country both of those people would be getting charged even if it is a movie set

 

[JeffreyLFC]

f*** him, he murdered someone. shouldn't murderers go to jail?

By that logic many police officer or military personnel or citizen that claim self defense too or hunter accident or malfunctioning guns usage they all should be jailed.

 

[DaaaaB's]

By that logic many police officer or military personnel or citizen that claim self defense too or accident like hunter accident or malfunctioning guns usage they all should be jailed.

I wouldn't waste your time, he just hates Baldwin because of his political views.

 

[JeffreyLFC]

I wouldn't waste your time, he just hates Baldwin because of his political views.

Yes the same logic could also be applied to every instance you kill someone by accident. Like a driver that kill another person after a car crash or running over a pedestrian or malfunction of the car break, etc.

 

[John Price]

I wouldn't waste your time, he just hates Baldwin because of his political views.

He shares my view. he's just a shitty person.

 

[Kiwi]

By that logic many police officer or military personnel or citizen that claim self defense too or hunter accident or malfunctioning guns usage they all should be jailed.

Self defense is completely different for a start, you are allowed to defend yourself and Baldwin certainly wasn't doing that

In a lot of places you would get charged in both those scenarios, including the firearm owner

 

[JeffreyLFC]

Self defense is completely different for a start, you are allowed to defend yourself and Baldwin certainly wasn't doing that

In a lot of places you would get charged in both those scenarios, including the firearm owner

Self defense, is also based on interpretation that you felt threatened. It's not black and white.

In this case you would have to justify that Baldwin killed her knowing the weapon was armed.

It seems pretty much negligence and not criminal, the victim family could ask for monetary damages but proving that Baldwin killed the victim on purpose is quite a stretch.

 

[Kiwi]

Self defense, is also based on interpretation that you felt threatened. It's not black and white.

In this case you would have to justify that Baldwin killed her knowing the weapon was armed.

It seems pretty much negligence and not criminal, the victim family could ask for monetary damages but proving that Baldwin killed the victim on purpose is quite a stretch.

It's a valid defense when you take somebody's life, woops my mistake isn't

That's murder, you don't need that to prove negligence you can also be charged for accidents if you can prove negligence to

Again that's murder, manslaughter covers things like negligence or accidental discharge of a firearm

 

[Babe Ruth]

So it comes down to if you think he acted so recklessly that he commited manslauther.

I just can't see it. Most people feel the same way, it's a waste of time by the prosecution. The only people who think there's anything there or want to see Baldiwn burn have something personal against him, likely driven by politics.

How do you know most people agree with you, what's your source?
And what difference would an outside consensus make anyways?.. it matters what the local DA & jury thinks.
If you believe that no one can truly want objective justice in this case, then you're revealing a lot about your perspective also.

 

[Hasbro]

He shares my view. he's just a shitty person.

Be thankful that's not illegal,

 

[sdf]

Bald win lmao

 

[Troy McClure]

good. he fired the shot that killed her. take responsibility instead of hiding behind rich lawyers

He hired lawyers. That’s what anyone accused of a crime who can afford lawyers does. Pretty strange thing to be mad about.