U.S. Up to 4 people, including Alec Baldwin, might end up facing charges in "Rust" shooting, distri

[ripcord]

Source: CBS News

A district attorney in New Mexico said she could be close to charging up to four people, including actor Alec Baldwin, in the "Rust" film set shooting that occurred in Santa Fe on Oct. 21, 2021. During the shooting, Baldwin's prop gun was discharged, killing cinematographer Halyna Hutchins and injuring director Joel Souza.

First Judicial District Attorney Mary Carmack-Altwies made an emergency funding request for $635,500 to continue to fund the investigation of the high-profile case.

"We are within weeks, if not days, of receiving the final report from the sheriff's office," Carmack-Altwies said during a New Mexico Board of Finance meeting on Sept. 20. She said while they are still awaiting reports "it's become apparent that we will be potentially charging between one and four people with criminal charges and each of those charges will probably include some variation of our homicide statute."

In a letter to the board of finance, the district attorney's office specified that Baldwin could be one of the possible defendants and that "this case could require up to four separate jury trials."

Read more: https://www.cbsnews.com/news/alec-baldwin-rust-shooting-district-attorney-says-up-to-four-people-could-get-charged-homicide/

---

Maybe the movie industry will show some common sense now and stop using actual firearms.

[hlthe2b]

1. "stop using actual (working) firearms"... yup at a minimum

Honestly, I think criminal charges will likely end up in acquittals. But, civil cases? That's where I think any justice that might be forthcoming will have to come as well as pressure asserted on the industry.

[Kaleva]

9. I agree

[Roy Rolling]

12. "The Industry"

“The Industry” has strict and enforced standards on the use of anything dangerous, including firearms used as props.

Many movies and TV shows have opted for post-production/CGI weapon discharges, something already in use by larger weapon-heavy movies.

But CGI is more expensive so some producers prefer blanks.

But new, overly-restrictive laws may not be the answer to avoid tragedies like this. And scouring existing statutes to find a violation against high profile individuals isn’t justice it’s attention-grabbing.

This is a civil matter, not a criminal matter. Fortunately the plaintiffs have defendants with deep pockets. It sucks, it isn’t perfect, but it’s something.

[NullTuples]

16. "The Industry" has strict and enforced standards...or the unions?

Who does the actual enforcing when it comes to safety? And if not the unions, who in each production is responsible?

[Roy Rolling]

20. There is Responsibility Up and Down the Food Chain

Somebody made a fatal error. An accident or negligence probably, unless it’s a deliberate act of sabotage.

It’s a heavily-unionized industry., there is a multi-page “Handling Firearms” sent to EVERY crew member each day firearm use is scheduled. Crew have the option of inspecting weapons for safety or leaving the set if unsafe.

It isn’t a perfect system, but the few firearm mishaps among thousands of script uses proves the risk is managed. Sadly, though, not for the DP.

It’s a tragedy, especially for her family, friends, and every one of her colleagues.

[yardwork]

27. Crews left this set. It sounds like it was an irresponsible, poorly managed production.

[NullTuples]

35. Ultimately then it comes down to the producers, especially the one that was on set.

[Mysterian]

25. It is a criminal matter

if a DA is considering charges.

[yardwork]

26. Liability will force the issue. This is going to cost millions in lawsuits.

The insurance companies will insist on changes. It will become too expensive to have real guns and ammo on sets.

[dem4decades]

2. I know the right wants Baldwin's skin but I have a hard time blaming him.

It was other people's job to insure that the weapons were safe. He's an actor, not a weapons expert.

[Calista241]

15. If you're going to point an actual working firearm at someone, for any reason

Then it’s your responsibility to ensure that you’re not going to kill or hurt someone.

[NullTuples]

17. He was also the on-set producer and chose to run the shop the way he did.

He went with non-union workers to make more profit & most of the reported indications were that the set was out of control. People were using the guns for target practice after the day's work was done!

[whistler162]

21. Like Truman's plaque said.....

"The Buck Stops Here!" He was a producer so it was part of his responsibility to ensure that the people he hired were qualified and competent to handle their assigned job.

[twodogsbarking]

24. I agree. How many times are actors given guns and the actor doesn't check it.

Baldwin was supposed to check it though. I don't get it.

[yardwork]

28. He was a producer so yes, he's partly responsible.

I don't think these charges are politically motivated. New Mexico is a blue state and Santa Fe is a progressive enclave.

[AngryOldDem]

29. You always assume a weapon -- any weapon -- is loaded.

That is Gun Lesson No. 1.

[dem4decades]

31. I've never been on a Hollywood set, I know in the real world you don't point a gun but

Hollywood isn't real.

Till it is.

[brush]

3. There should be charges. That first time armorer and whoever hired her...

should get the stiffest ones IMO.

How do you hire an inexperienced person to such a critical job?

[ripcord]

4. The armorer wasn't even on the set at the time of the shooting

The producers, one of whom was Alec Baldwin, decided she would be of more use that day working with the props master while a gun was being used on the set. The gun was left outside the set, on a cart, in the open for hours with no one on location being responsible for it.

There is also the fact that whoever is holding a gun that goes off is responsible for the outcome of it firing according to the law, there is no exclusion in the law for movie sets and actors. Armorers aren't certified or licensed in any way, they operate only on insurance rules and lack the authority to change any part of the law about the person holding the gun being the one who is responsible for its use.

[Kaleva]

8. +1

[whistler162]

22. Alec Baldwin in his role as producer

[no_hypocrisy]

5. There will be a trial with the purpose of fact-finding.

Sure, there's the possibility of conviction, but not a probability.

The only way to discover what really happened is to convene a court trial with testimony under oath and other evidence with all persons with intimate knowledge of the circumstances.

Baldwin can't be a non-party witness. He held the gun that fired the shot.

[NullTuples]

18. He was also the on-set producer. It was ultimately his responsibility to run a safe shop.

[Dopers_Greed]

6. Homicide? Really?

I can see a manslaughter charge happening, but no way was this intentional.

Also, the armorer/prop people are more at fault than Baldwin.

[Kaleva]

7. Homicide can be either manslaughter or murder

[FakeNoose]

10. It's negligent homicide - because someone died unintentionally

... but it could have been prevented. I believe it's called 3rd degree in most states.

First degree is intentionally killing someone by forethought and planning. Second degree is killing someone, not by plan but "on the spur of the moment." (For example a sudden angry argument that leads to a shooting.)

Since the weapon was left out in the open, anyone could have grabbed it and inserted real bullets, THEN they have grounds for a 1st degree murder. However apparently there are no witnesses to that, and the weapon wasn't examined before they used it on the set. It looks like a set up for Baldwin to take the blame for this, but who knows?

[NullTuples]

19. That's always bothered me because negligence can be quite intentional

- to make more profit
- out of laziness
- out of spite
- etc, etc.

[Farmer-Rick]

30. To tell you honestly I always kind of thought

Some psycho set up Baldwin.

The person, who put live bullets in the gun that was supposed to hold blanks and left it there, had to know this would not turn out well. But who really knows?

[intheflow]

38. I have thought likewise.

Someone wanted to punish Baldwin for his SNL portrayal of TFG.

[Warpy]

11. Not surprised, I always thought he'd face manslaughter, at the least

because he not only fired the gun, he fired it in a direction where other people were standing.

He probably won't get the same penalty as whoever screwed up and brought live rounds onto the set, but the charge is appropriate.

Life lesson: don't take anyone else's word that a gun is either unloaded or is loaded with blanks, never point it at anyone you don't intend to kill at some point.

[Blues Heron]

13. whoever loaded the gun is the guilty party, period.

Once they solve the mystery of who inserted the live bullet into the gun then justice can be served. Otherwise its just pretty much scapegoating.

[Kaleva]

33. There's no excuse for ignoring basic safety rules

I wonder how much training Baldwin got on the safe handling of guns before he was handed one?

As long as people like Baldwin treat gun safety as a joke, there will be innocents killed.

[Blues Heron]

36. its a movie set, people point guns at each other and pull the trigger all the time

its totally normal. Someone set him up, or royally screwed up. You cant expect every last actor to be a gun expert, thats just not realistic. Thats why they are supposed to have props people taking care of all that. They are the experts or are supposed to be. Imagine if every actor started second guessing every responsible props person? they would never find a live round, and would quickly get a reputation as difficult to work with.

Luckily the existing system is 99.9999 effective - this event is a terrible but very very rare anomaly. When was the last one - Brandon Lee? Think how many gunshots have been filmed without incident since Brandon. Zillions.

[Kaleva]

37. You don't need to be an expert to understand the basic safety rules

With the hundreds of millions of guns in the country, people don't abide by the basic safety rules countless times in a day. The vast majority of time, nothing tragic happens.

Arguing that since these events are so rare, training and safety are not needed is not something I'd ever support.

I'll cut slack for a 3 year old who points a gun at his mother and kills her as he is too young to understand guns are dangerous. I won't cut any slack though for an older teen or adult of sound mind

Would you point a gun at someone if you were told to do so? I wouldn't. Even if a paycheck depended on it.

[Omaha Steve]

14. Kick

[Aussie105]

23. Negligent homicide simple enough.

Who needs to be charged?

Whoever brought live ammo onto the set to have some fun plinking at targets.
Whoever didn't check that the gun was unloaded - the "fun" people, the armourer, Baldwin himself.

Straightforward case of stoopid accumulating and leading to accidental death.

[marshall]

32. What could the armored do?

The only thing she had the power to do was quit and walk off the set, like so many others did. I think she was hired because while she might have been qualified, her lack of experience and clout in the industry made her easy to push around. She advised those in charge that protocols were not being followed, and then her skilled authority was undermined by shifting her to her lower level prop assistant job.

[Kaleva]

34. A cascade of errors

[calimary]

39. When I was still working, I went onto sets quite often. And I'll never forget the shoot-out scene

I watched from the sidelines, while waiting for whenever the director could break from that to talk to me. And after the scene was shot, I got my access to him and asked him about shooting action scenes like that one, and he chuckled with twinkling eyes, "mayhem! Mayhem!"