Halyna Hutchins Shot With Prop Gun - Alec Baldwin indicted & Hannah Gutierrez-Reed charged, 2021 #6

Status
Not open for further replies.
Will Alec Baldwin face jail time? Explaining the actor's involuntary manslaughter charges


Would Alec Baldwin have been charged if he were only an actor on the film?

"Your job is acting, and if you have to worry about whether a gun is loaded, that will impact your ability to act," Custodio says. "So my feeling is that charges for Alec aren’t about him as actor but him as a producer. And there seems to be evidence his set was fast and loose when it came to weapons."

Ritter agrees. "I can’t imagine holding someone responsible if your only responsibility is hearing from an armorer that a weapon is safe so you can then act," he says. "Clearly, prosecutors feel there was a larger breakdown and that (Baldwin) was responsible."

"................."

Will Alec Baldwin go to jail?

It's possible, but legal experts have their doubts Baldwin in particular would receive jail time. Baldwin has already settled the suit brought by Hutchins' husband, who in his new role as a "Rust" producer is unlikely to help New Mexico prosecutors in aggressive pursuit of the film's star, Ritter says.

"I would be shocked if anyone did custody time on this," he says. "Maybe probation and community service and fines and fees and safety messaging. But to put Baldwin behind bars for what everyone still agrees is a horrific accident would be a bit much."

But Baldwin is clearly whom New Mexico prosecutors want to hold accountable, says Neama Rahmani, a former federal prosecutor and president of West Coast Trial Lawyers in Los Angeles.

"This is a very aggressive charging decision," he says, noting that New Mexico lawmakers allotted $317,000 last fall to prosecutors working the "Rust" case to allow them to continue pursuing charges. "You don't bark unless you're ready to bite."

".................."

"There's a safe assumption if Halls has accepted a plea, he will be helping the prosecution," Ritter says. "There's a good chance both Baldwin and Gutierrez-Reed were offered pleas as well, but maybe they just didn't want to accept that. Don’t be shocked if they both do negotiate something down the line."
 
Last edited:

A Hollywood Armorer on the Rust Shooting Charges​

Who’s responsible for the on-set shooting, and how can the movie industry prevent the next one?

(A few quotes)

Hannah Gutierrez-Reed, the armorer, was inexperienced. There was live ammunition on the set. That’s just absurd.

And the assistant director never should have been handling any of those firearms or the props. That’s the armorer’s job.

(...)

Baldwin has been doing this long enough. He’s been in a lot of movies, action movies and things like that. If someone hands him a gun, what’s stopping him from looking down and looking through that chamber and saying, “oh, I got rounds in here”? “Why are we dealing with rounds? Are they dummy rounds? Can I inspect the dummy rounds myself?" He’s totally okay to ask that.

(...)

It’s funny to me how there are so many rules, especially in filmmaking. If there’s going to be a candle on a table in a scene, I kid you not: They will have a briefing about the fire risk that day. And they will have a fire marshal on set for a candle. It’s so amazing to me, especially nowadays, because you can do so much with technology. Everyone’s seen a good flickering LED candle.

(...)

These people are so concerned with “My character’s left-handed, so I have to spend six weeks eating soup with my left hand.” There are so many microscopic details that they pay attention to, and yet they gloss over firearm safety and realistic acting with firearms.

There aren’t people on a film set whose job it is to come in and say, “Don’t do that.” It’s very difficult to because of the hierarchy. An armorer can come in and handle weapons, but good luck trying to speak up when you hand an A-list celebrity a pistol, and he puts his finger on the trigger and he’s not supposed to. I’ve been there: “You can’t say anything to them in front of the rest of the crew. It’ll be embarrassing.”

(...)

 
That looks like a pretty article but I couldn't read it all.
It seems to me that in this day and age of special effects, a director would much prefer to NOT have real firearms on the set at all. It would just make things so much easier. The desire for more "reality" is getting absurd. I am firearms enthusiast, but I don't care if the gun an actor has in a movie isn't real.
 

A Hollywood Armorer on the Rust Shooting Charges​

Who’s responsible for the on-set shooting, and how can the movie industry prevent the next one?

(A few quotes)

Hannah Gutierrez-Reed, the armorer, was inexperienced. There was live ammunition on the set. That’s just absurd.

And the assistant director never should have been handling any of those firearms or the props. That’s the armorer’s job.

(...)

Baldwin has been doing this long enough. He’s been in a lot of movies, action movies and things like that. If someone hands him a gun, what’s stopping him from looking down and looking through that chamber and saying, “oh, I got rounds in here”? “Why are we dealing with rounds? Are they dummy rounds? Can I inspect the dummy rounds myself?" He’s totally okay to ask that.

(...)

It’s funny to me how there are so many rules, especially in filmmaking. If there’s going to be a candle on a table in a scene, I kid you not: They will have a briefing about the fire risk that day. And they will have a fire marshal on set for a candle. It’s so amazing to me, especially nowadays, because you can do so much with technology. Everyone’s seen a good flickering LED candle.

(...)

These people are so concerned with “My character’s left-handed, so I have to spend six weeks eating soup with my left hand.” There are so many microscopic details that they pay attention to, and yet they gloss over firearm safety and realistic acting with firearms.

There aren’t people on a film set whose job it is to come in and say, “Don’t do that.” It’s very difficult to because of the hierarchy. An armorer can come in and handle weapons, but good luck trying to speak up when you hand an A-list celebrity a pistol, and he puts his finger on the trigger and he’s not supposed to. I’ve been there: “You can’t say anything to them in front of the rest of the crew. It’ll be embarrassing.”

(...)

Sounds like Armorers operate in what some safety researchers call the "ethical crumple zone," where you are responsible for outcomes but have little or no authority to influence process. <modsnip>

Professor Nancy Leveson said it best: "Human Error is a Symptom, Not a Cause."
<modsnip - no source link for image>
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Sounds like Armorers operate in what some safety researchers call the "ethical crumple zone," where you are responsible for outcomes but have little or no authority to influence process. <modsnip>

Professor Nancy Leveson said it best: "Human Error is a Symptom, Not a Cause."

<modsnip - no source link for image>
While some of this is accurate, it in no way alleviates Ms. Reed from her responsibility. When a person agrees to take on a very important safety position, that person doesn't get to just say, "i was bullied from doing my job." Other people, like Halyna Hutchins, were relying on her to do her job. She didn't. If she was being prevented from her job, it was her responsibility, legally and morally, to let others know. She didn't. Are others liable as well? Sure. But she was the one that people on the set were relying on her to do her job to keep them safe. She failed, AND she knew the set wasn't safe and didn't warn anyone.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
While some of this is accurate, it in no way alleviates Ms. Reed from her responsibility. When a person agrees to take on a very important safety position, that person doesn't get to just say, "i was bullied from doing my job." Other people, like Halyna Hutchins, were relying on her to do her job. She didn't. If she was being prevented from her job, it was her responsibility, legally and morally, to let others know. She didn't. Are others liable as well? Sure. But she was the one that people on the set were relying on her to do her job to keep them safe. She failed, AND she knew the set wasn't safe and didn't warn anyone.
Agree absolutely, but she did express safety concerns to her higher-ups on set. It doesn't absolve her of her terrible mistakes but I don't think it is accurate to say she never warned anyone that things weren't ideal. This is just one example I have read of where she has said she raised concerns...

(...)

The armorer describes how she “fought” for training days to work with actors handling their guns but was told by higher-ups on the “Rust” production that the performers didn’t need it because they were all “trained people.” Still, she got time with Baldwin, although she said he was “distracted” and on his phone throughout their training session.

She fretted “he might honestly shoot himself in the arm” if he didn’t practice more with his holster, and reached out to the actor’s assistant to set up further training. However, Baldwin did not show up for a second training session, she said.

(...)

 
Agree absolutely, but she did express safety concerns to her higher-ups on set. It doesn't absolve her of her terrible mistakes but I don't think it is accurate to say she never warned anyone that things weren't ideal. This is just one example I have read of where she has said she raised concerns...

(...)

The armorer describes how she “fought” for training days to work with actors handling their guns but was told by higher-ups on the “Rust” production that the performers didn’t need it because they were all “trained people.” Still, she got time with Baldwin, although she said he was “distracted” and on his phone throughout their training session.

She fretted “he might honestly shoot himself in the arm” if he didn’t practice more with his holster, and reached out to the actor’s assistant to set up further training. However, Baldwin did not show up for a second training session, she said.

(...)

But she is raising that with the same people she claims are the problem. And she stays on the job providing her services. She knows others, that don't know, are relying on her. It is like a lifeguard. Parents bring the kids to the beach, seeing the lifeguard. The lifeguard knows he can't swim and rescue anyone, but he doesn't tell the swimmers. He sees parents looking at him, seeing him on his stand, knowing they are relying on him, but he says nothing. He complains to the beach operator, but he never tells the swimmers and parents that it isn't safe. The armorer either has to buck up and take control, or quit, or at minimum make an announcement to the cast and crew. She can't just stay on the job and collect her check. But that is what she did. It doesn't matter that she is young and inexperienced.
 
But she is raising that with the same people she claims are the problem. And she stays on the job providing her services. She knows others, that don't know, are relying on her. It is like a lifeguard. Parents bring the kids to the beach, seeing the lifeguard. The lifeguard knows he can't swim and rescue anyone, but he doesn't tell the swimmers. He sees parents looking at him, seeing him on his stand, knowing they are relying on him, but he says nothing. He complains to the beach operator, but he never tells the swimmers and parents that it isn't safe. The armorer either has to buck up and take control, or quit, or at minimum make an announcement to the cast and crew. She can't just stay on the job and collect her check. But that is what she did. It doesn't matter that she is young and inexperienced.
But AB was a producer, in a position of responsibility on set, much higher up the pecking order than her, as well as lead actor. He knew she wanted more training time with him. And he didn't take her concerns seriously. She messed up through inexperience. The production company and line producer as well as her boss, propmaster SZ, also dismissed her concerns and told her to focus more on her key props assistant role. She was inexperienced and didn't know how to best handle the situation. She will pay a heavy price for this unquestionably.
 
"Prosecutors have secured David Halls' testimony in their case against Baldwin and Rust's armorer Hannah Gutierrez-Reed, reports Variety. Baldwin accidentally shot-and-killed Hutchins after being given a loaded gun during filming.

Previous witnesses have said that Halls handed Baldwin the gun and that he declared it a 'cold gun' despite the presence of live ammo in the chamber, according to a search warrant. 'Cold gun' is a term used on sets to notify that live ammo isn't being used.

In a December deposition with the New Mexico Occupational Health and Safety Bureau, Halls denied giving Baldwin the gun, saying he gave it to Gutierrez-Reed. He also accused Gutierrez-Reed of declaring 'cold gun.' "


 
@steeltowngirl -- not sure how to reply from the prior thread but re this statement: "But wait. HG-R took the gun to the church and handed it to Halls. She knew they were rehearsing, yet she still left". Do you have a link saying that she knew they were rehearsing? The article that I posted says she claims that she did not know AB was rehearsing drawing his gun:

BBM:

"[She] also said that, in the minutes before the shooting, she left the church where filming was taking place to comply with COVID-19 protocols and to attend to other props. She said she didn't know Baldwin was inside rehearsing drawing his gun. Gutierrez Reed said that if she were in the church at the time, she would have told Baldwin not to point the gun at Hutchins, a typical safety measure for the use of guns on film sets."

https://www.npr.org/2022/01/13/1072...-ammo-supplier-over-the-deadly-on-set-shootin

I'm glad you posted this. If that report is accurate it strikes me as completely irresponsible and totally negligent for management to not allow Gutierrez Reed into the church because of Covid restrictions.

In a practice run for a movie scene involving a real working firearm the set armorer is a crucial member of the team. In this photo that was taken just before the fatal shooting I count at least seven cast and crew members on the set.

Why wasn't the armorer also allowed on the set?

 
I'm glad you posted this. If that report is accurate it strikes me as completely irresponsible and totally negligent for management to not allow Gutierrez Reed into the church because of Covid restrictions.

In a practice run for a movie scene involving a real working firearm the set armorer is a crucial member of the team. In this photo that was taken just before the fatal shooting I count at least seven cast and crew members on the set.

Why wasn't the armorer also allowed on the set?

Good catch about the COVID restrictions. But was she not actually allowed in? Or did she choose to follow the COVID advisory, which the others were not following? Why did she take the gun to the church at all, if she didn’t think that gun-related rehearsing was underway?

Conflicting information in two different media reports:


“Gutierrez-Reed's lawsuit says she was not inside the mock church when Baldwin shot the cinematographer Halyna Hutchins on the afternoon of October 21 because she believed that no gun-related rehearsing was underway. The suit adds that she also knew the film set's COVID-19 protocols advised against a large number of people crowding inside an enclosed space.

The lawsuit says no one called Gutierrez-Reed back into the church when Baldwin began rehearsing the scene, which involved a cross draw, even though her presence was required for any gun-related filming or rehearsing.“


Not a scheduled rehearsal​

“According to Gutierrez-Reed, the scene Baldwin was practicing was not a scheduled rehearsal, and instead, assistant director Dave Halls had been "sitting in" with the gun. In the lawsuit, the armorer claims a gun wasn't supposed to be used at all during that time.

Gutierrez-Reed was not allowed in the church at the time due to COVID-19 protocols. Throughout filming, video monitors had been placed outside of buildings being used so crew members could see what was going on. On the day of the shooting, the monitors weren't working, according to the lawsuit.

Gutierrez-Reed claimed if she had been notified that a gun was being used, she could have instructed Baldwin on safe gun practice while cross-drawing a weapon.”

 
Last edited:
"The last photo of Halyna Hutchins before she was shot dead by Alec Baldwin"

Pic at link* caught my attn, because
1. No credit is displayed in the image itself. I wonder, who took it. I don't recall seeing this one before, but there have been zillions.
2. Could just be me, but is it CGI, possibly from that CGI(?) vid released many months ago. Anyone else think so? TiA
I forget who and why it was created.


@MajorHoople. Thanks for the story & link.
 
Last edited:
When and if "Rust" actually is released, who really wants to see it? It will always be related to the death of Halyna Hutchins to me. Seems macabre.
It always struck me as a super low budget movie that had minimal commercial appeal anyway--and I say that as someone who loves a good Western generally. I am not even sure how many people would watch it out of morbid curiosity now, which is probably just as well since I'd be surprised if it's ever finished after the charges, despite the plans to move forward with completion.
 
That looks like a pretty article but I couldn't read it all.
It seems to me that in this day and age of special effects, a director would much prefer to NOT have real firearms on the set at all. It would just make things so much easier. The desire for more "reality" is getting absurd. I am firearms enthusiast, but I don't care if the gun an actor has in a movie isn't real.
Digital is more expensive in post-production. This was a low budget film. Also, Alec wanted it to be in an authentic Western.

They had two non-functioning Colt .45 revolvers that should have been selected for an unscheduled rehearsal where there was to be no use of blanks and just practicing a cross draw. Armorer should have been the one selecting from the cart.She was over doing hair and wardrobe instead.

 
"Prosecutors have secured David Halls' testimony in their case against Baldwin and Rust's armorer Hannah Gutierrez-Reed, reports Variety. Baldwin accidentally shot-and-killed Hutchins after being given a loaded gun during filming.

Previous witnesses have said that Halls handed Baldwin the gun and that he declared it a 'cold gun' despite the presence of live ammo in the chamber, according to a search warrant. 'Cold gun' is a term used on sets to notify that live ammo isn't being used.

In a December deposition with the New Mexico Occupational Health and Safety Bureau, Halls denied giving Baldwin the gun, saying he gave it to Gutierrez-Reed. He also accused Gutierrez-Reed of declaring 'cold gun.' "


Digital is more expensive in post-production. This was a low budget film. Also, Alec wanted it to be in an authentic Western.

They had two non-functioning Colt .45 revolvers that should have been selected for an unscheduled rehearsal where there was to be no use of blanks and just practicing a cross draw. Armorer should have been the one selecting from the cart.She was over doing hair and wardrobe instead.

It's maybe not a total defence for HG-R but how can it possibly be justifiable for any of the cast and crew to be messing with firearms when the armourer isn't present? They know, AB more than others, that the armourer is there as a safety supervisor. She may well have left the guns "lying around" (or she may not, the facts will out in the trial) but everyone should have known not to be messing with them without her being present.

On the subject of "cold gun" that article states that it has the meaning it attaches to it but I'm not sure that that is actually true.

No movie set would use a phrase to refer to a gun as not being loaded with "live" ammunition as live ammunition is essentially never used on movies these days (not in probably 7 decades, in any event). Why would you have a phrase to refer to a situation that would never occur anyway?

As far as I can tell, it refers to a gun which had no blank ammunition in it. That makes total sense as blank ammo can also be deadly as seen in the death is John Hexum in the 1980s. Several actors, Jeffrey Wright I think was one, have said that "cold gun" is not a phrase they've ever heard on a movie set so there is obviously more than one system in use.

In any event, Halls had no authority to attest to the state of the firearm and AB would have obviously known that he didn't. That puts it squarely on him and even more so if the statement does indeed refer to a gun without live ammo as it obviously implies that the presence of live ammo is is a foreseeable risk!

The Firearms expert, the bald guy who's been on a few of the video links in here, put it very well, and I think it was also mentioned on here months back, that if the scene they were rehersing was a suicide scene involving ABs character then would he have taken the word of anyone that it was safe or would he have checked the gun and ammo himself? No one can say for certain but I'm damn sure which option my money would be on! I'm also damn sure what option I'd be taking if I were him and it would involve a gun with a non-functioning cylinder!

All my opinion, obvs!
 
No movie set would use a phrase to refer to a gun as not being loaded with "live" ammunition as live ammunition is essentially never used on movies these days (not in probably 7 decades, in any event). Why would you have a phrase to refer to a situation that would never occur anyway?

As far as I can tell, it refers to a gun which had no blank ammunition in it. That makes total sense as blank ammo can also be deadly as seen in the death is John Hexum in the 1980s. Several actors, Jeffrey Wright I think was one, have said that "cold gun" is not a phrase they've ever heard on a movie set so there is obviously more than one system in use.
Above RSBM, that is correct.. it was actually spelled out in the article linked below, that that is exactly what that means. Even if the gun had been 'hot', it would've meant it had blanks instead of dummies, NOT live bullets. imo.

And would we REALLY want all these people (AD, actor himself) opening, possibly unloading/reloading, to confirm there were no real bullets.... would that not be a disaster about to happen, in itself? Would that not in itself, create the potential for a terrible accident, IF in fact there were an actual live bullet in there?

Matters of life and death on set are never just one person’s responsibility. After Lee’s death on The Crow, investigators chose not to prosecute any of the crew, saying the negligence that caused the accident was not willful or wanton. But after that, checking for loose fragments in prop guns and verifying for everyone within the vicinity whether a gun was full of dummies (“cold”) or loaded with blanks (“hot”) became far more rigorous.

“This Cannot Be Right”: How the Gun in Alec Baldwin’s Hands Turned the ‘Rust’ Set Deadly
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
121
Guests online
3,722
Total visitors
3,843

Forum statistics

Threads
592,277
Messages
17,966,532
Members
228,735
Latest member
dil2288
Back
Top