Halyna Hutchins Shot With Prop Gun - Alec Baldwin indicted & Hannah Gutierrez-Reed charged, 2021 #7

[arielilane]

Whether you're an experienced armorer, an actor or whatever, there's no common sense to be found on the set. Simple as that. Maybe too many show-offs? idk. moo

 

[turaj]

There are many people liable for this death...some have settled, some have gotten immunity too and some are being tried. The only one being judged yesterday was Hannah and I think the jury got it just right. I think the State prosecutor Morrissey was excellent and look forward to her up against AB.

 

[housewife]

That just isn't true.

Negligence resulting in death and injury most certainly is a crime.

Someone please correct me if I'm wrong...

This is an issue with wording.
I think "criminal negligence" is just a descriptor for certain criminal offenses.

For example:
Offenses that may result from criminal negligence include: involuntary manslaughter, negligent vehicular homicide, criminal neglect or endangerment of a child, negligent storage of firearms, or negligent keeping of a dangerous dog.

 

[MyBelle]

I think in AB’s trial what will be central to the prosecution’s case is that he pointed and pulled the trigger when the scene didn’t even call for it. That he was going rogue on several other scenes and firing shots willy nilly and that this created an unsafe environment. The focus will be that he was entitled, rushing people, and a general horse’s behind. Oh and by the way he didn’t check the gun or have HGR demonstrate that the gun was safe to be fired/used. I’m betting the general tenor in his trial will be he’s a B-list actor at best who thinks he’s an A-list actor and acts entitled. If the prosecution brings in high profile actors to testify that they always check the gun themselves etc and that it’s standard AB is cooked. JMO

BBM. I disagree. They were determining camera angles and blocking the scene so of course AB pointed the gun wherever the Director told him to point it.

The prosecutor will have to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that AB KNEW there was live ammo on the set. I find it highly doubtful.

JMO

 

[arielilane]

@CourtTV

Julie Grant says Hannah Gutierrez's conviction was warranted but more people besides Gutierrez and Alec Baldwin are criminally responsible.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1765829888219480096

 

[Marantz4250b]

Safety of the gun was the job responsibility of the armorer, not the actor. HGH was convicted for failing to do her job and her failure resulted in the death of another human being.

Movie sets can be very dangerous. That's the point of having an armorer.

JMO

'Rust' is the latest in a long history of accidental deaths on movie sets

Before 'Rust,' fatal accidents have been all too common on film sets in the past.

ew.com

With respect, that is completely wrong. Each and every time a firearm is used, in any capacity, the person using that firearm has a responsibility to make sure it is used safely and that they personally know that what they are doing with it is safe.

That holds true of every use of a firearm by every person using any firearm, anywhere. Actors do not, and should not, operate under a lesser duty of care exclusive to their profession. If that is the case then where do we draw the line? Surely police officers and members of the military should also benefit from this lower duty of care as, after all, they actually exist for something which most people will agree is a far greater social benefit (public and national safety) than do mere actors pretending to kill people for entertainment purposes?

If you aren't prepared to take the heat when the wheel comes off then don't use firearms. It really is that simple.

 

[oc1234]

BBM. I disagree. They were determining camera angles and blocking the scene so of course AB pointed the gun wherever the Director told him to point it.

The prosecutor will have to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that AB KNEW there was live ammo on the set. I find it highly doubtful.

JMO

If he KNEW there were live rounds in the gun, he would be charged with Murder as opposed to Involuntary Manslaughter.

 

[PrairieWind]

With respect, that is completely wrong. Each and every time a firearm is used, in any capacity, the person using that firearm has a responsibility to make sure it is used safely and that they personally know that what they are doing with it is safe.

That holds true of every use of a firearm by every person using any firearm, anywhere. Actors do not, and should not, operate under a lesser duty of care exclusive to their profession. If that is the case then where do we draw the line? Surely police officers and members of the military should also benefit from this lower duty of care as, after all, they actually exist for something which most people will agree is a far greater social benefit (public and national safety) than do mere actors pretending to kill people for entertainment purposes?

If you aren't prepared to take the heat when the wheel comes off then don't use firearms. It really is that simple.

What law in New Mexico states that an actor must check the gun he/she is handed on a set?

 

[Weki]

If he KNEW there were live rounds in the gun, he would be charged with Murder as opposed to Involuntary Manslaughter.

Right! And Halls testified that the scene was just for him to draw the weapon out of his holster not point. AB has said that the victim asked him to point at her and pull the hammer back. No one who testified at HGR’s trial has corroborated this as far as I can recall. If someone recalls something diff please point me to it if you have the time. AB had also said he never pulled the trigger. He’s lying and that will be key at his trial. He’s basically blamed the victim and said she asked him to point and shoot at her. And I believe he’s doing this so he can get around the negligence in handling firearms issue that so many have pointed out in here.

There’s a standard of care that is basic to criminal negligence cases. There doesn’t have to be a specific law in NM governing how actors have to behave on set when handling guns in order for AB to be guilty here. Was he indifferent to a reasonable standard of care towards others? That’s the key question. JMO as a non lawyer from observing other manslaughter cases.

 

[MyBelle]

If he KNEW there were live rounds in the gun, he would be charged with Murder as opposed to Involuntary Manslaughter.

AB shouldn't have been charged at all.

JMO

 

[MyBelle]

Right! And Halls testified that the scene was just for him to draw the weapon out of his holster not point. AB has said that the victim asked him to point at her and pull the hammer back. No one who testified at HGR’s trial has corroborated this as far as I can recall. If someone recalls something diff please point me to it if you have the time. AB had also said he never pulled the trigger. He’s lying and that will be key at his trial. He’s basically blamed the victim and said she asked him to point and shoot at her. And I believe he’s doing this so he can get around the negligence in handling firearms issue that so many have pointed out in here.

There’s a standard of care that is basic to criminal negligence cases. There doesn’t have to be a specific law in NM governing how actors have to behave on set when handling guns in order for AB to be guilty here. Was he indifferent to a reasonable standard of care towards others? That’s the key question. JMO as a non lawyer from observing other manslaughter cases.

BBM. During AB's trial, the DA will have to prove AB was lying. It was irrelevant in this recent trial.

Considering the fact that the entire point of the rehearsal was to determine camera angles, the DA is going to have a tough time proving guilt at AB's trial.

JMO

 

[Marantz4250b]

What law in New Mexico states that an actor must check the gun he/she is handed on a set?

Everyone has a duty of care towards others, surely?

Not checking that something is safe, especially something which is designed to kill people, is a breech of that duty of care, is it not?

Actors are subject to the same duty of care as is everyone else.

 

[Marantz4250b]

AB had also said he never pulled the trigger. He’s lying and that will be key at his trial. He’s basically blamed the victim and said she asked him to point and shoot at her. And I believe he’s doing this so he can get around the negligence in handling firearms issue that so many have pointed out in here.

There’s a standard of care that is basic to criminal negligence cases. There doesn’t have to be a specific law in NM governing how actors have to behave on set when handling guns in order for AB to be guilty here. Was he indifferent to a reasonable standard of care towards others? That’s the key question. JMO as a non lawyer from observing other manslaughter cases.

To be very generous to him, I can accept that it may not be an outright lie. I mean in the sense that, although its clearly not true, he genuinely may not have realised that he pulled the trigger or had it depressed when he retracted the hammer.

Knowing how those guns work, and having read the various reports on this particular gun, there is absolutely no doubt that he pulled the trigger. It could not have been fired any other way.

 

[Marantz4250b]

BBM. During AB's trial, the DA will have to prove AB was lying. It was irrelevant in this recent trial.

Considering the fact that the entire point of the rehearsal was to determine camera angles, the DA is going to have a tough time proving guilt at AB's trial.

JMO

They don't have to prove anything of the sort.

I can't bring to mind the specific wording of the crime of Involuntary Manslaughter but it's something along the lines of ...failing to exercise such reasonable circumspection given the circumstances..., or similar. It translates, essentially, into ...did the defendant take account of the risks of what he was doing and how his actions may affect others...?.

Bottom line - he did not, as far as we can tell, take reasonable steps to make sure that what he was doing with that gun was reasonably safe in the circumstances. Taking someone's word that it was safe - especially the word of someone who was not the armourer - does not clear that "reasonable circumspection" bar, in my humble opinion.

 

[GRT]

But the Screen Actor's Guild as said it is NOT the actor's job to check the gun. That is the industry standard. And negligence is not a crime. AB has excellent defenses to his charges. His trial, if there is one, will look very different than HGR's. You wont see the OSHA results, you wont have allegations of drug use by the defendant.

I get that's a Guild policy, but I think general firearm safety procedures probably supersede that.

True, negligence, by itself, is not a crime, but criminally negligent homicide is. Involuntary manslaughter is, and reckless endangerment is. Those are all charges that stem from negligence, and AB is facing involuntary manslaughter charges.

I have a hard time getting past the fact AB's father was the school's shooting coach and then buying that AB had no exposure to firearms or proper safety protocol.

I don't think a Guild policy negates AB's responsibility.

But, that's all MOO.

 

[IDK]

Everyone has a duty of care towards others, surely?

Not checking that something is safe, especially something which is designed to kill people, is a breech of that duty of care, is it not?

Actors are subject to the same duty of care as is everyone else.

This may be way off base, but in my mind, I see a parallel to when a surgeon mistakenly operates on the wrong limb or removes the wrong kidney. They are following what’s been told to them by others— trusting and not verifying.

In the US there have been major reforms in operating rooms requiring the OR staff, including surgeons, to take a time out and verify which limb is to be amputated, for example. The correct limb will have a note written on it in Sharpie as a visual reminder.

These are systemic issues, IMO.

 

[Weki]

It’s a jury question of whether AB was not being criminally negligent because he’s an actor on a set and trusted the armorer to do her job OR he IS criminally negligent because he should’ve checked the gun with the armorer too and never pointed it at someone and pulled the trigger without doing so. That’s under the province of a jury, as they say. I think you can reasonably come down on either side. That’s why I said that Morrissey’s strategy will be to focus on all the other reckless things AB was doing on that set and say that he was behaving recklessly in general. For eg., no one said point and shoot and he does, the director says cut and he fires anyway etc. JMO

 

[Marantz4250b]

I get that's a Guild policy, but I think general firearm safety procedures probably supersede that.

True, negligence, by itself, is not a crime, but criminally negligent homicide is. Involuntary manslaughter is, and reckless endangerment is. Those are all charges that stem from negligence, and AB is facing involuntary manslaughter charges.

I have a hard time getting past the fact AB's father was the school's shooting coach and then buying that AB had no exposure to firearms or proper safety protocol.

I don't think a Guild policy negates AB's responsibility.

But, that's all MOO.

I never knew that about AB's father! As you suggest - that very strongly implies that AB has a pretty thorough knowledge of how to safely operate firearms. It seems to me to be extremely unlikely that his father didn't teach him the basic rules of safe gun handling!

 

[Marantz4250b]

This may be way off base, but in my mind, I see a parallel to when a surgeon mistakenly operates on the wrong limb or removes the wrong kidney. They are following what’s been told to them by others— trusting and not verifying.

In the US there have been major reforms in operating rooms requiring the OR staff, including surgeons, to take a time out and verify which limb is to be amputated, for example. The correct limb will have a note written on it in Sharpie as a visual reminder.

These are systemic issues, IMO.

A scalpel and a firearm are good comparators (is that the right word?) - if you aren't willing to accept the risks of your mistakes then don't pick either of them up.

 

[Lexiintoronto]

Everyone has a duty of care towards others, surely?

Not checking that something is safe, especially something which is designed to kill people, is a breech of that duty of care, is it not?

Actors are subject to the same duty of care as is everyone else.

I think that’s what it boils down to.

Listening to the prosecutor, she made it clear that this is a case about a woman being killed due to multiple failures in proper gun handling procedure. That a film was being produced doesn’t excuse anyone’s liability.

An armorer bypassed at least five known safety rules that resulted in a fatal shooting and was found criminally responsible.

Alec didn’t check his weapon, aimed it at two people and fired the gun, killing one. As a producer and main actor on the set he also allegedly ignored firearm safety issues that led up to that point.

My views only based on the recent trial and what has been reported.