Alec Baldwin "Rust" Shooting

[Jarhead0331]

Anyone else following the trial of the Rust set armorer, Hannah Gutierrez-Reed? Pretty interesting stuff. As most people may know, while filming a scene for the movie, Alec Baldwin drew a revolver that discharged a live round, striking and killing cinematographer Halyna Hutchins. The bullet also passed through Hutchins hitting an assistant producer who survived. Gutierrez-Reed is charged with two counts of involuntary manslaughter and one count of tampering with evidence. If found guilty, she could serve up to three years.


The prosecution rested on Monday. Defense should finish their case before the end of the week. Trial is being aired and can be seen in segments on YouTube Court TV or Law & Crime Network.

Alec Baldwin's trial is scheduled to begin in July.

[ArizonaTank]

Tragic and very sad. A young lady is dead and a man was injured due to carelessness. Hopefully an urgent sense of weapon safety comes out of this in Hollywood. Even if they don't do it themselves, the insurance underwriters will probably see to it.

[al_infierno]

Anyone else following the trial of the Rust set armorer, Hannah Gutierrez-Reed? Pretty interesting stuff. As most people may know, while filming a scene for the movie, Alec Baldwin drew a revolver that discharged a live round, striking and killing cinematographer Halyna Hutchins. The bullet also passed through Hutchins hitting an assistant producer who survived. Gutierrez-Reed is charged with two counts of involuntary manslaughter and one count of tampering with evidence. If found guilty, she could serve up to three years.


The prosecution rested on Monday. Defense should finish their case before the end of the week. Trial is being aired and can be seen in segments on YouTube Court TV or Law & Crime Network.

Alec Baldwin's trial is scheduled to begin in July.

I'm very curious for your take on this issue.  My gut reaction is that Baldwin is at the very least equally at fault because he had the gun in his hand, and anyone who grew up around guns has "don't point it at someone and pull the trigger unless you wanna kill them" ingrained from a very early age... but Baldwin isn't exactly a "gun guy."

On the other hand, people familiar with film sets claim that it's a different dynamic there, that gun safety is basically all on the armorer, and if the actor accidentally kills someone it's 100% the armorer's fault.  I call BS on this because Baldwin was unnecessarily pointing the gun at a human being when he pulled the trigger.

[GDS_Starfury]

On the other hand, people familiar with film sets claim that it's a different dynamic there, that gun safety is basically all on the armorer, and if the actor accidentally kills someone it's 100% the armorer's fault.  I call BS on this because Baldwin was unnecessarily pointing the gun at a human being when he pulled the trigger.

the first part is correct.  the second part is not.  an actor is handed a prop by the armorer and expects it to be in a safe to operate condition.  this is why theres a prop master and an armorer.  the take the director wanted had Baldwin pointing the gun at the camera.  this is done it tons of action scenes.

[al_infierno]

On the other hand, people familiar with film sets claim that it's a different dynamic there, that gun safety is basically all on the armorer, and if the actor accidentally kills someone it's 100% the armorer's fault.  I call BS on this because Baldwin was unnecessarily pointing the gun at a human being when he pulled the trigger.

the first part is correct.  the second part in not.  an actor is handed a prop by the armorer and expects it to be in a safe to operate condition.  the take the director wanted had Baldwin pointing the gun at the camera.  this is done it tons of action scenes.

Gotcha, thanks for the clarification!

[GDS_Starfury]

back in the day I worked at a mega club in Ft Lauderdale and we would run live scenes from movies on stage while the djs were doing there thing.  one night we did a bit from Reservoir Dogs and this dipshit wanted to use a Luger as a prop.  I kept asking him to take out the magazine and clear the gun.  he kept refusing to the point where I was about to grab him by the neck and start punching until the general manager walked up asking what the problem was.  after I explained the situation he was fired.  this was maybe 2 years after the Crow accident. 

[al_infierno]

^ Holy cow, I thought that was bad until I read "2 years after The Crow incident."  What a dummy! 

[GDS_Starfury]

I've also never seen a situation where there are lots of actors/extras and a table full of real guns and people just grab what they want.  each individual weapon is logged out to a specific person.  exceptions to this might be repurposed nerf guns or some such thing.  there are also lots of real gun shells that cant fire bullets but are rigged up with propane cartridges to simulate muzzle flash.  the first big use of that system, I think, was Airwolf.

its good to be informed.  

[Jarhead0331]

On the other hand, people familiar with film sets claim that it's a different dynamic there, that gun safety is basically all on the armorer, and if the actor accidentally kills someone it's 100% the armorer's fault.  I call BS on this because Baldwin was unnecessarily pointing the gun at a human being when he pulled the trigger.

the first part is correct.  the second part is not.  an actor is handed a prop by the armorer and expects it to be in a safe to operate condition.  this is why theres a prop master and an armorer.  the take the director wanted had Baldwin pointing the gun at the camera.  this is done it tons of action scenes.

It is much more complicated than this. If it wasn't, you can rest assured that prosecutors would not have charged Baldwin or been able to get a grand jury indictment against him. Under Mew Mexico law, a jury can very plausibly conclude that Baldwin is guilty of involuntary manslaughter, even if his conduct was not intentional, assuming his conduct was "reckless." Section 2.02 of the Model Penal Code defines criminal recklessness as follows:

"A person acts recklessly...when he consciously disregards a substantial and unjustifiable risk that [death] will result from his conduct. The risk must be of such a nature and degree that, considering the nature and purpose of his conduct and the circumstances known to him, its disregard involves a gross deviation from the standard of conduct that a law-abiding person would observe in the actor's situation."

It is important to note that Baldwin was not only an actor on this set, he was also a producer. Therefore, his duties with respect to safety are varied and multi-layered. When firearms are involved, there are many safety requirements at state and federal levels imposed on the film industry. For instance, an OSHA inspector testified today that film producers failed to follow required guidelines for scenes where firearms are pointed in the direction of cameras and crew.

While there is no direct precedent for these charges, it is clear that Baldwin's defense that he relied on professionals with whom he worked who assured him that the gun did not have live rounds, might not exonerate him in the eyes of the jury considering the risk involved if the "professionals" are wrong.

The jury could conclude that the actor was reckless in not checking before he aims and fires off a lethal shot because the actor who is to point a real pistol at another human being, and pull the trigger, also has a duty to check, and does not shed the legal or moral responsibility elsewhere. In other words, the actor firing a supposedly "cold" gun at another human being is the person with the last clear chance to avert a senseless tragedy and since under New Mexico law, involuntary manslaughter is the "unlawful killing of a human being without malice committed in the commission of ... a lawful act which might produce death ... without due caution and circumspection..." Baldwin can be found guilty if the jury concludes, based on the weight of the evidence, that Baldwin's conduct was reckless and that he acted without due caution and circumspection.

It has been made very clear that this set was extremely chaotic and disorganized and that there were failures in firearms safety at many levels. In my personal opinion, many people have culpability for this tragedy, of which Baldwin is but one.

[Uberhaus]

What do the role of Baldwin's cajoling the armourer to hurry, combined with his power to hire and fire as well as end a career, play in his responsibility as well as limiting the irresponsible armourer's culpability?

[Jarhead0331]

What do the role of Baldwin's cajoling the armourer to hurry, combined with his power to hire and fire as well as end a career, play in his responsibility as well as limiting the irresponsible armourer's culpability?

I don't think that Baldwin's conduct will serve as a complete defense to the criminal negligence of the armorer. However, and as noted in my post above, Baldwin's dual role as actor and producer does increase his exposure in that as someone with managerial authority, he had at least some responsibility to ensure that the safety protocols that were adopted by the production team were actually followed. There has been testimony that beyond adopting the policies, nothing was done to actually implement them. I think this, in and of itself, can serve as a basis for culpability under the standards imposed by NM law for a charge of involuntary manslaughter. Hell, even the First assistant director plead guilty to the negligent use of a weapon and while on the stand, he took full responsibility for the role his omissions played in the tragedy.

[GDS_Starfury]

fwiw a lot of "producers" have the title because they get funding for the production.  they have very little or no direct oversight of running things on set day to day.  thats the directors job.

[GDS_Starfury]

iirc this whole thing happened while doing establishment shots for future filming.

[Jarhead0331]

fwiw a lot of "producers" have the title because they get funding for the production.  they have very little or no direct oversight of running things on set day to day.  thats the directors job.

That clearly is not the case on this is set. All you have to do is watch some of the videos of Baldwin directing the armorer to "hurry up" and "load the guns" and "load more than one gun at a time so we're ready to go..." Baldwin exerted a lot of direct control and there has been testimony that his instructions to the armorer were way beyond what should have been permissible. A more experienced armorer may have pushed back, but with a young girl on her second film against a star of his caliber, the pressure must have been very intense.

[GDS_Starfury]

admittedly I have paid almost no attention to the case, I'm just giving you my experiences of working in the environment.