Alec Baldwin Fatally Shoots Crewmember on Film Set

[The Crypto Guy]

Involuntary manslaughter may be applied here, but you have so many levels of responsibility here.

You would have to find who is actually criminally responsible here.

Alec Baldwin, definitely isn't it. He unknowingly fired a pistol loaded with live rounds.

You would have to prove that he knowingly grabbed a loaded gun.

At best, those responsible for the actual firearm props will take the brunt of the consequences.

I just don't see anyone going to jail over this. I would be surprised.

If he knowingly grabbed a loaded gun and shot her with that then it would be a straight up murder. He was still reckless that he didn't have the proper safeguards in place before pulling that trigger. And the definition of negligence homicide is "The crime of criminally negligent homicide involves causing someone's death by acting in a manner that was reckless, inattentive, or careless."

 

[Egg]

"The crime of criminally negligent homicide involves causing someone's death by acting in a manner that was reckless, inattentive, or careless."

If I drive a city bus with faulty brakes and get 20 people killed, am I responsible for crashing the bus where an abrupt stop was required, or the mechanic for failure to maintain the vehicle to retaining its ability to stop which would have prevented the accident in the first place?

He was handed a "safe" gun. Procedures will confirm or deny this. He is at no fault, if he was handed the gun. The person handing him the gun, was.

 

[Egg]

It makes sense on my bus comment, if I was speeding, but if I followed all procedures, then the responsibility isn't mine.

Just like if a pilot had a blade on his motor explode.

He did all his checks. His mechanic didn't replace the blades per scheduled.

How is that pilot at fault?

 

[The Crypto Guy]

If I drive a city bus with faulty brakes and get 20 people killed, am I responsible for crashing the bus where an abrupt stop was required, or the mechanic for failure to maintain the vehicle to retaining its ability to stop which would have prevented the accident in the first place?

He was handed a "safe" gun. Procedures will confirm or deny this. He is at no fault, if he was handed the gun. The person handing him the gun, was.

He was a producer, he is responsible for everything overall. He hired an unqualified staff to do a serious job, there were red flags everywhere on set about safety, as a producer he is responsible for things like that.

 

[Egg]

He was a producer

He carries responsibility for his hire, but you're essentially stating Air Canada's CEO would or should face potential jail time time for an aircraft crashing.

Even poorly maintained, at best, the mechanic would take the fall.

There is zero way he faces a day in jail for this. He is rich, so his lawyer would at best settle a lawsuit.

 

[The Crypto Guy]

He carries responsibility for his hire, but you're essentially stating Air Canada's CEO would or should face potential jail time time for an aircraft crashing.

Even poorly maintained, at best, the mechanic would take the fall.

There is zero way he faces a day in jail for this. He is rich, so his lawyer would at best settle a lawsuit.

Your examples , the plane and bus, aren’t similar at all with this. Those two would be MASSIVE companies and are talking about a mechanical issue, this was a very small set with a small handful of people who are in charge of things overall, and he being one of them, also this wasnt a mechanical issue. And then he was also the one who used the gun to kill the lady.

 

[Osprey]

Baldwin is 1 of 6 producers, but it's also his production company, he co-wrote the story and he's been producing films for 2 decades while the rest have been for 5 years or less. It's safe to assume that he has the most authority.

 

[Cloned]

Just watched some interviews with Rosanna Arquette and others at a film festival where they were asked about this.

Arquette advocated for the use of CGI to prevent this from happening again.

Harvey Keitel was NOT happy about it and said the first thing you learn as a marine is to check the gun yourself to make sure it's not loaded.

Jeffrey Wright said the Rust set was mismanaged and that every set he's worked on with guns has always been safe.

Ray Liotta demonstrated exactly what they do on a set to make sure the gun isn't loaded.

 

[Egg]

also this wasnt a mechanical issue. And

It was a negligence issue. A highly preventable accident.

It's no different than a scheduled brake change that wasn't done properly, that causes death.

That's negligence. Criminal negligence that caused a highly preventable loss of life.

Baldwin was driving the faulty bus, but if it cannot be proven that he did so knowingly, cannot be held criminally responsible for this.

Laws don't care about rumors or armchair detectives. They care about evidence.

 

[izlez]

Always teach a gun as though it is loaded. That is why if you are aiming at a camera and PEOPLE for christ sake you can't be using a fireable weapon!

Don't these things contradict each other? Always treat a gun as though it's loaded = NEVER point it at someone unless you are prepared to kill them?

 

[Richard]

Don't these things contradict each other? Always treat a gun as though it's loaded = NEVER point it at someone unless you are prepared to kill them?

Did you point a cap gun at a person?

If its a real, "live" gun, it should never be pointed at a person. Period. You must always treat it like it is loaded. If you need a real gun to fire blanks you manage the scene so that it is firing toward a proper backdrop and don't give the actor/stunt man the prop until you've cleared the area and given explicit instructions.

I don't get what is so hard about this?

 

[Voight]

Just watched some interviews with Rosanna Arquette and others at a film festival where they were asked about this.

Arquette advocated for the use of CGI to prevent this from happening again.

Harvey Keitel was NOT happy about it and said the first thing you learn as a marine is to check the gun yourself to make sure it's not loaded.

Jeffrey Wright said the Rust set was mismanaged and that every set he's worked on with guns has always been safe.

Ray Liotta demonstrated exactly what they do on a set to make sure the gun isn't loaded.

Even though technology is great now, I don't think CGI is the answer.

 

[izlez]

Did you point a cap gun at a person?

If its a real, "live" gun, it should never be pointed at a person. Period. You must always treat it like it is loaded. If you need a real gun to fire blanks you manage the scene so that it is firing toward a proper backdrop and don't give the actor/stunt man the prop until you've cleared the area and given explicit instructions.

I don't get what is so hard about this?

I guess that is what you said. I guess there was a disconnect with you saying, to paraphrase, "make sure that there isn't a round in the chamber" and "you can't be using a fire-able weapon". I was under the impression you meant no bullet in the chamber = non-fire-able

 

[tarheelhockey]

Harvey Keitel was NOT happy about it and said the first thing you learn as a marine is to check the gun yourself to make sure it's not loaded.

That seems completely irrelevant. Actors are not marines, and marines don't have assistants whose literal professional job is to check the gun and then hand it to them unloaded.

 

[Richard]

I guess that is what you said. I guess there was a disconnect with you saying, to paraphrase, "make sure that there isn't a round in the chamber" and "you can't be using a fire-able weapon". I was under the impression you meant no bullet in the chamber = non-fire-able

It's cool I acknowledge I am a terrible writer! haha

No, a live firing weapon, even loaded with blanks, should NEVER be pointed at anyone.

A non-firing weapon, aka a prop gun, can be pointed at someone.

 

[Osprey]

That seems completely irrelevant. Actors are not marines, and marines don't have assistants whose literal professional job is to check the gun and then hand it to them unloaded.

Well, Keitel was a Marine before he was an actor. The firearms training that he received seems somewhat relevant to me. You're right that most actors weren't Marines and have assistants, but he's implying that Marines do have people who check guns before they're handed to them, yet they check them, themselves, anyways. He's just arguing that actors should do the same. You could argue that that isn't practical and that they shouldn't have to do that, and you could be right, but his experience still seems relevant to his argument.

 

[JeffreyLFC]

That seems completely irrelevant. Actors are not marines, and marines don't have assistants whose literal professional job is to check the gun and then hand it to them unloaded.

Assistant AND Armorer!

 

[BigBadBruins7708]

Assistant AND Armorer!

Doesn't matter.

It is the responsibility of whoever is holding the gun the ensure the safety of it. That means 1. a visual check of the chamber to confirm loaded/unloaded status and 2. you are responsible for muzzle discipline.

A failure of either or both of those results in a negligent discharge, and absolutely means you are responsible for the result of that discharge.

 

[Richard]

Doesn't matter.

It is the responsibility of whoever is holding the gun the ensure the safety of it. That means 1. a visual check of the chamber to confirm loaded/unloaded status and 2. you are responsible for muzzle discipline.

A failure of either or both of those results in a negligent discharge, and absolutely means you are responsible for the result of that discharge.

A prop gun has "fake" bullets in the chamber and especially, in regards to a revolver you wouldn't want any actor to take apart a gun. IT was yelled cold gun, meaning prop gun, your actor should NEVER be taking apart a gun... period.

 

[Richard]

Well, Keitel was a Marine before he was an actor. The firearms training that he received seems somewhat relevant to me. You're right that most actors weren't Marines and have assistants, but he's implying that Marines do have people who check guns before they're handed to them, yet they check them, themselves, anyways. He's just arguing that actors should do the same. You could argue that that isn't practical and that they shouldn't have to do that, and you could be right, but his experience still seems relevant to his argument.

You can't have actors checking guns, period. It's just a horrendously bad idea, I don't care if your actor was former special forces.

 

[Nona Di Giuseppe]

You know he is the producer right? Yea, he is responsible for things like that, he’s not just an actor on some random show.

no no no.

he's an executive producer.. you know that's just a title so he can get paid more right ?

 

[Nona Di Giuseppe]

You can't have actors checking guns, period. It's just a horrendously bad idea, I don't care if your actor was former special forces.

this.

I work in film. Cast don't even grab their own water/food. They can't be entrusted with anything, and shouldn't be.

You have an expert on set for that. An armsmaster and a prop master.

Shit. When I have worked on shows with bows and arrows we had an arms master on set. When a bow was being held unsafely (cocked) by a background; you never saw anyone yell louder and run faster to correct the situation.

And that was with a fake arrow.

 

[JeffreyLFC]

Doesn't matter.

It is the responsibility of whoever is holding the gun the ensure the safety of it. That means 1. a visual check of the chamber to confirm loaded/unloaded status and 2. you are responsible for muzzle discipline.

A failure of either or both of those results in a negligent discharge, and absolutely means you are responsible for the result of that discharge.

I am not sure I understand what you mean.
It's like having an actor jumping out of an airplane and blaming him on his own death because of a faulty parachute. By claiming that he should have checked himself although it's not his role nor is he the specialist in the mater. It's negligence

 

[Nona Di Giuseppe]

Doesn't matter.

It is the responsibility of whoever is holding the gun the ensure the safety of it. That means 1. a visual check of the chamber to confirm loaded/unloaded status and 2. you are responsible for muzzle discipline.

A failure of either or both of those results in a negligent discharge, and absolutely means you are responsible for the result of that discharge.

You are wrong.

 

[Nona Di Giuseppe]

Baldwin is 1 of 6 producers, but it's also his production company, he co-wrote the story and he's been producing films for 2 decades while the rest have been for 5 years or less. It's safe to assume that he has the most authority.

It's still not his job. The conditions on set, yes. He could be held accountable for that. But there's three other people that are hired to specifically make sure that gun is safe. He's at fault for hiring the people that hired those people at best.