Things Not Going Well for Alec Baldwin

[South Austin 53235]

1 hour ago, henrygandorf said:

not going another 15 rounds over this.

I see what you did there.

[TreatyOak 17404]

8 hours ago, Hmbre97 said:

Not sure why you're so hung up on what he said. He could easily show in court that during production of a film, it is not customary for the actor themselves to check and deem a weapon safe and that the responsibility falls on the armorer. Her question and his comment are meaningless in this. Just because she asked if he'd like to check doesn't then transfer liability to him.

It would be like Joe Q. Public taking his car to Discount Tire for repair work, then afterwards gets on the interstate and an improperly torqued wheel goes flying off into a bus full of nuns, killing them in the process. It wouldn't make two shits if the Discount Tire tech asked the customer before he pulled off "hey, you wanna check the torque specs on those lugnuts?". The onus doesn't then fall to the customer just because the trained professional asked if the untrained person would like to verify. That's not their job.

Thanks. I think that is a reasonable explanation. Sounds like they may have over-charged him. 

[TreatyOak 17404]

7 hours ago, Texas Flood said:

Yeah there’s no pressure.

It's an actual issue. Here in Texas, we have done a magnificent job of chasing away Hollywood film production and sending it to Louisiana, Michigan and New Mexico. Our glorious state government made it mandatory for a portion of film grants to be spent on films about Texas, which was a pointlessly limiting maneuver. That and high production costs have set the industry here way back. 

Sounds like some idiot New Mexico politician tried to pull an election stunt here, and they may have run the risk of having production companies look elsewhere. 

[C-Man 27806]

56 minutes ago, TreatyOak said:

It's an actual issue. Here in Texas, we have done a magnificent job of chasing away Hollywood film production and sending it to Louisiana, Michigan and New Mexico. Our glorious state government made it mandatory for a portion of film grants to be spent on films about Texas, which was a pointlessly limiting maneuver. That and high production costs have set the industry here way back. 

Sounds like some idiot New Mexico politician tried to pull an election stunt here, and they may have run the risk of having production companies look elsewhere. 

I'll take your word for the shit the Texas Lege has done to run off Hollywood -- sounds like something short-sighted those dipshits would do -- but the Baldwin/NM situation isn't even remotely similar and will do nothing to discourage movies from being made there.

[TreatyOak 17404]

6 minutes ago, C-Man said:

I'll take your word for the shit the Texas Lege has done to run off Hollywood -- sounds like something short-sighted those dipshits would do -- but the Baldwin/NM situation isn't even remotely similar and will do nothing to discourage movies from being made there.

That's good to hear. I hope you're right! 

[horn4life 3838]

1 hour ago, TreatyOak said:

It's an actual issue. Here in Texas, we have done a magnificent job of chasing away Hollywood film production and sending it to Louisiana, Michigan and New Mexico. Our glorious state government made it mandatory for a portion of film grants to be spent on films about Texas, which was a pointlessly limiting maneuver. That and high production costs have set the industry here way back. 

Sounds like some idiot New Mexico politician tried to pull an election stunt here, and they may have run the risk of having production companies look elsewhere. 

Definitely changes in laws and credits have hurt production in Texas.  Still a fair amount around the state, but Austin area would be busy as fuck if the folks that ran our fair state focused on something that could actually be productive and revenue generating without a lot of investment nor negative side effects... but I know... Trans kids, own the libs..

Back on Topic- hell Baldwin was always overcharged from the get go, because criminality was going to be hard to prove beyond a reasonable doubt.... really hard.  There are civil avenues that are/will be exercised.  Better to underpromise and overdeliver.  The charges made that an impossibility given the facts.

[TreatyOak 17404]

29 minutes ago, horn4life said:

Back on Topic- hell Baldwin was always overcharged from the get go, because criminality was going to be hard to prove beyond a reasonable doubt.... really hard.  There are civil avenues that are/will be exercised.  Better to underpromise and overdeliver.  The charges made that an impossibility given the facts.

He has already paid an undisclosed amount to the husband and son of Halyna Hutchins. However, he is fighting to have a "misguided" further suit brought against him by her parents and sister thrown out on the grounds that they had no contact w/ Halyna for years. 

IMHO, his failure to take responsibility for it from the very beginning interview has been reprehensible. From running a shoddy production (which had the crew quitting the production prior to the accident due to safety concerns) to actually pulling the trigger, he has a lot to answer for. Now, to sue the hopeless idiot he hired as the "armorer" is just sad. I understand that there may be legal reasons for his actions but it all makes him look cruel and petty.    

Edited April 21, 2023 by TreatyOak

[Texas Flood 1386]

2 hours ago, TreatyOak said:

It's an actual issue. Here in Texas, we have done a magnificent job of chasing away Hollywood film production and sending it to Louisiana, Michigan and New Mexico. Our glorious state government made it mandatory for a portion of film grants to be spent on films about Texas, which was a pointlessly limiting maneuver. That and high production costs have set the industry here way back. 

Sounds like some idiot New Mexico politician tried to pull an election stunt here, and they may have run the risk of having production companies look elsewhere. 

As someone with a movie that will likely go in the late fall/early 2024 and seriously looking at NM as a possible location (also partnered with a distributor the film & tv subforum salivates over) - that isn't true. 

NM is a very attractive state with their incentive, facilities, and relative experienced talent pool. This episode will not discourage future production work from the industry. No one in the business is seriously talking like that.

[jimmyjazz 47262]

I thought the Texas lege hamstrung the film industry here by cutting subsidies that previously encouraged film production in the state?  Am I recalling that incorrectly?

[hobbes2702 13498]

16 hours ago, Nivek said:

It was discussed earlier in the thread.  Basically, the industry norm is to have experts handle the firearms and clear them.   Some actors (like a Keanu Reeves who is very comfortable around firearms) probably has permission to check them, but most defer to the experts (armorer).  In this case, the armorer fucked up.  

I’m not sure why this is so hard for some folks

[Willfully Horn 8270]

On 1/19/2023 at 2:41 PM, TheRealRonWeaver? said:

Libs are so fucking pwned.

Cons have been completely conned.

Edited April 21, 2023 by Willfully Horn
Spelling

[hobbes2702 13498]

15 hours ago, otisdog said:

It was reported earlier that the weapon held live ammo. Failure to check the weapon is negligent, having live ammo on a set is criminal.

Apparently it’s not

[956 Worldwide 35599]

3 hours ago, TreatyOak said:

It's an actual issue. Here in Texas, we have done a magnificent job of chasing away Hollywood film production and sending it to Louisiana, Michigan and New Mexico. Our glorious state government made it mandatory for a portion of film grants to be spent on films about Texas, which was a pointlessly limiting maneuver. That and high production costs have set the industry here way back. 

Sounds like some idiot New Mexico politician tried to pull an election stunt here, and they may have run the risk of having production companies look elsewhere. 

I haven’t followed this but have no reason to doubt you. That’s pretty blatantly just a vehicle to easier channel state funds to constituents and cronies. I’d be fine to establish a state fund to encourage the depiction of Texas and our people and culture and history in art— but the GOP is allergic to stuff like that. 

[956 Worldwide 35599]

35 minutes ago, hobbes2702 said:

I’m not sure why this is so hard for some folks

People like @TreatyOak are honestly engaging on this, and they get it. But there’s a big subset who have set up their force-fields on this story, because a Lib did Something Irresponsible with a Gun.  And that’s catnip. 
 

For the gun nut crowd the Sanctity of Gun Safety is part of the mythos of the gun. And all of them act as though their daddy’s brief at the range or before a dove hunt or before getting in the blind entrusted them with Sacred Wisdom that is kept by Responsible Gunowners. As though nearly every Texan of a certain age, even those of us who want better gun control, either didn’t get that brief or we have neglected that commandment. This commandment is up there with Thou Shall Not Use the Word ‘Clip’ in Vain and Thou Shalt Remember that AR Means Armalite. Those who do not keep these commandments (libs) are not worthy to have an opinion on guns. 
 

It would be fascinating to cross reference at the time opinions on whether Cheney should have been criminally charged for shooting his hunting buddy in the face with those who want to see Baldwin in jail. That mofo KNEW his shotgun was loaded and chambered and he violated the Gun Safety Brief. 

[TreatyOak 17404]

1 hour ago, Texas Flood said:

As someone with a movie that will likely go in the late fall/early 2024 and seriously looking at NM as a possible location (also partnered with a distributor the film & tv subforum salivates over) - that isn't true. 

NM is a very attractive state with their incentive, facilities, and relative experienced talent pool. This episode will not discourage future production work from the industry. No one in the business is seriously talking like that.

Great to hear about NM production. And congrats on your project! That is very exciting! Good luck and please share updates!!!! 

[TreatyOak 17404]

56 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

I thought the Texas lege hamstrung the film industry here by cutting subsidies that previously encouraged film production in the state?  Am I recalling that incorrectly?

That is correct. They also tied state funds to this stupid provision that you had to make films about Texas and they wanted to approve the scripts!!!!!!!

[TreatyOak 17404]

9 minutes ago, 956 Worldwide said:

People like @TreatyOak are honestly engaging on this, and they get it. But there’s a big subset who have set up their force-fields on this story, because a Lib did Something Irresponsible with a Gun.  And that’s catnip. 
 

For the gun nut crowd the Sanctity of Gun Safety is part of the mythos of the gun. And all of them act as though their daddy’s brief at the range or before a dove hunt or before getting in the blind entrusted them with Sacred Wisdom that is kept by Responsible Gunowners. As though nearly every Texan of a certain age, even those of us who want better gun control, either didn’t get that brief or we have neglected that commandment. This commandment is up there with Thou Shall Not Use the Word ‘Clip’ in Vain and Thou Shalt Remember that AR Means Armalite. Those who do not keep these commandments (libs) are not worthy to have an opinion on guns. 
 

It would be fascinating to cross reference at the time opinions on whether Cheney should have been criminally charged for shooting his hunting buddy in the face with those who want to see Baldwin in jail. That mofo KNEW his shotgun was loaded and chambered and he violated the Gun Safety Brief. 

Being that it is generally understood that Cheney was drunk at the time, it probably constituted a criminal act.

[Willfully Horn 8270]

There are no gun accidents. Only negligence. -Stonekettle

[WhatTheBuck 28937]

19 minutes ago, 956 Worldwide said:

People like @TreatyOak are honestly engaging on this, and they get it. But there’s a big subset who have set up their force-fields on this story, because a Lib did Something Irresponsible with a Gun.  And that’s catnip. 
 

For the gun nut crowd the Sanctity of Gun Safety is part of the mythos of the gun. And all of them act as though their daddy’s brief at the range or before a dove hunt or before getting in the blind entrusted them with Sacred Wisdom that is kept by Responsible Gunowners. As though nearly every Texan of a certain age, even those of us who want better gun control, either didn’t get that brief or we have neglected that commandment. This commandment is up there with Thou Shall Not Use the Word ‘Clip’ in Vain and Thou Shalt Remember that AR Means Armalite. Those who do not keep these commandments (libs) are not worthy to have an opinion on guns. 
 

It would be fascinating to cross reference at the time opinions on whether Cheney should have been criminally charged for shooting his hunting buddy in the face with those who want to see Baldwin in jail. That mofo KNEW his shotgun was loaded and chambered and he violated the Gun Safety Brief. 

And then the dumbfuck who got shot APOLOGIZED TO CHENEY for all the trouble he caused him by getting shot. Fucking Republicans, man. 

[henrygandorf 29228]

19 minutes ago, 956 Worldwide said:

People like @TreatyOak are honestly engaging on this, and they get it. But there’s a big subset who have set up their force-fields on this story, because a Lib did Something Irresponsible with a Gun.  And that’s catnip. 

it would've been sooooooo much better for them if he was outside his lane, checking the gun "for safety purposes" and it went off and killed/injured someone.  we never would've heard the end of "you see, the way it works on a film set, is that only person who handles the blah blah stupid libs".

[WhatTheBuck 28937]

18 minutes ago, TreatyOak said:

That is correct. They also tied state funds to this stupid provision that you had to make films about Texas and they wanted to approve the scripts!!!!!!!

Sounds like the Chinese. 

[Nivek 17420]

15 hours ago, TreatyOak said:

No one has yet addressed the issue I raised, which is that Baldwin admitted to the police in his very first interrogation that he didn't check the weapon because he didn't want to insult the armorer.

 

My uncle was an extra on the movie The Crow and he was also in several Matlock episodes (one of which he was holding a gun pointed directly at the camera).  He never owned or shot firearms in his life.  He was a mechanic and did handyman type jobs.   My uncle was just given a revolver and told to stand there and point this here and mean mug the camera. 

Can you imagine the clusterfuck of trying to shoot a movie where you hand out firearms to the actors and extras and have to then stop and review with each one, for each scene and to make sure that no yahoo stuffs something in there?     Keep in mind there is quite a bit of variety in firearms, falling block, muzzle loaded, magazine, stripper clips, top breach, swing out cylinder, those little swing outs on SA revolvers, side magazines, top magazines, bottom fed, belt fed, etc.   

 

 

Edited April 21, 2023 by Nivek

[RomaVicta 30612]

2 hours ago, TreatyOak said:

He has already paid an undisclosed amount to the husband and son of Halyna Hutchins. However, he is fighting to have a "misguided" further suit brought against him by her parents and sister thrown out on the grounds that they had no contact w/ Halyna for years. 

IMHO, his failure to take responsibility for it from the very beginning interview has been reprehensible. From running a shoddy production (which had the crew quitting the production prior to the accident due to safety concerns) to actually pulling the trigger, he has a lot to answer for. Now, to sue the hopeless idiot he hired as the "armorer" is just sad. I understand that there may be legal reasons for his actions but it all makes him look cruel and petty.    

Negged for distortion and likely willfully lying due to political stance. Why should he take responsibility for something the court just decided he couldn't be charged with? He immediately expressed grief for what happened. It killed someone he knew.

The production company and Baldwin (likely targeted as the deep pockets attached to the production) did take some responsibility when settling with Halyna Hutchins' husband. From Rolling Stone:

Quote

Filming for the Western film will now resume in January 2023, with all “the original principal players” expected to return, including director Joel Souza who was also injured in the accident, according to a statement released by Baldwin’s attorney on Wednesday morning. 

Terms of the settlement agreement are unknown, but Hutchins’ husband Matthew Hutchins will come onboard as an executive producer and receive a cut of the movie’s profits, CNN reports. After his wife’s death last October, Hutchins filed a wrongful death suit against the Rust production and Baldwin in February in Santa Fe, New Mexico. 

If Baldwin were aligned politically with the howling dogs that want to defame him, maybe they would go after the husband as an opportunist looking to further his movie career by joining the outfit he sued as an executive producer. 

I won't go there because I don't presume to know something based on my political hatred opinion leaders.

Now fuck right off.

 

 

Edited April 21, 2023 by RomaVicta

[C-Man 27806]

1 hour ago, hobbes2702 said:

Apparently it’s not

It likely will be for the armorer.

[South Austin 53235]

19 minutes ago, Nivek said:

Can you imagine the clusterfuck of trying to shoot a movie where you hand out firearms to the actors and extras and have to then stop and review with each one, for each scene and to make sure that no yahoo stuffs something in there?     Keep in mind there is quite a bit of variety in firearms, falling block, muzzle loaded, magazine, stripper clips, top breach, swing out cylinder, those little swing outs on SA revolvers, side magazines, top magazines, bottom fed, belt fed, etc.   

Here’s an idea to reduce safety concerns in filmmaking.

 

[henrygandorf 29228]

9 minutes ago, RomaVicta said:

an executive producer and receive a cut of the movie’s profits

[RomaVicta 30612]

We know the drill.

[TreatyOak 17404]

41 minutes ago, RomaVicta said:

Negged for distortion and likely willfully lying due to political stance. Why should he take responsibility for something the court just decided he couldn't be charged with? He immediately expressed grief for what happened. It killed someone he knew.

The production company and Baldwin (likely targeted as the deep pockets attached to the production) did take some responsibility when settling with Halyna Hutchins' husband. From Rolling Stone:

If Baldwin were aligned politically with the howling dogs that want to defame him, maybe they would go after the husband as an opportunist looking to further his movie career by joining the outfit he sued as an executive producer. 

I won't go there because I don't presume to know something based on my political hatred opinion leaders.

Now fuck right off.

 

 

LOL. You negged me. Mercy! What shall I ever do? 

• Baldwin produces a half-ass funded movie where key crew members walk off the set for safety reasons--before the shooting.
• He hires an untrained idiot who cause havoc on her only other production that had the lead actor storm off the set due to her incompetence. Safety first! 
• They overload their untrained girl and double her job requirements, making her handle props, as well. She and other morons are seen firing guns on the edge of the set.
• He tells the police he was invited to check the gun, but he passes on it. 
• Then he shoots and kills his cinematographer! 
• After killing her, he invites her widowed husband to share in profits of the movie. So in other words, the money he will pay will come from future earnings as they go ahead and decide to release the movie hoping the movie can recoup investment due to the morbid curiosity factor. Good thing there's nothing unseenly about that! 
• And then, in a final, touching gesture, he sues the idiot employee! That's a good look. 

Maybe you should find some new heroes. 

P.S. I've never voted Republican in my life. Have a nice day! 

[henrygandorf 29228]

1 minute ago, TreatyOak said:

• He tells the police he was invited to check the gun, but he passes on it. 

smartest thing he's done.

[RomaVicta 30612]

1 hour ago, TreatyOak said:

LOL. You negged me. Mercy! What shall I ever do? 

Become honest.

[hobbes2702 13498]

2 hours ago, C-Man said:

It likely will be for the armorer.

As it should be.

[hobbes2702 13498]

1 hour ago, TreatyOak said:

LOL. You negged me. Mercy! What shall I ever do? 

• Baldwin produces a half-ass funded movie where key crew members walk off the set for safety reasons--before the shooting.
• He hires an untrained idiot who cause havoc on her only other production that had the lead actor storm off the set due to her incompetence. Safety first! 
• They overload their untrained girl and double her job requirements, making her handle props, as well. She and other morons are seen firing guns on the edge of the set.
• He tells the police he was invited to check the gun, but he passes on it. 
• Then he shoots and kills his cinematographer! 
• After killing her, he invites her widowed husband to share in profits of the movie. So in other words, the money he will pay will come from future earnings as they go ahead and decide to release the movie hoping the movie can recoup investment due to the morbid curiosity factor. Good thing there's nothing unseenly about that! 
• And then, in a final, touching gesture, he sues the idiot employee! That's a good look. 

Maybe you should find some new heroes. 

P.S. I've never voted Republican in my life. Have a nice day! 

This is really really dumb. Just a lot of stupid and being mad at Baldwin because reasons.

Your first couple bullets are a failure to understand what an executive producer does.

Your point about him not checking the gun is irrelevant to anything.

I think if I shot someone to death because the armorer didn’t do their job I would have some issues with them too.

[WhatTheBuck 28937]

2 minutes ago, hobbes2702 said:

This is really really dumb. Just a lot of stupid and being mad at Baldwin because reasons.

Your first couple bullets are a failure to understand what an executive producer does.

Your point about him not checking the gun is irrelevant to anything.

I think if I shot someone to death because the armorer didn’t do their job I would have some issues with them too.

Gee, that must mean Alec Baldwin is your hero too. 

[TreatyOak 17404]

24 minutes ago, hobbes2702 said:

This is really really dumb. Just a lot of stupid and being mad at Baldwin because reasons.

Your first couple bullets are a failure to understand what an executive producer does.

I do know. His lack of funding set the stage for a half-ass production. Hence, they were forced to hire frighteningly under-qualified people like Hannah. And, when the crew started quitting due to safety issues and the fact that they pulling double-shifts on half a night's sleep (cause they forced to stay in shite motels an hour and a half away), they didn't replace them. They simply increased the responsibilities of the remaining crew, like placing Hannah on props AND firearms, which is way outside film union standards. Now if he was back in Hollywood not really understanding what was going on, I could sort-of accept it, although it's a violation of the union. But he was there every day watching his little shit-show unfold. 

I don't have anything personally against him, but as someone who made TV commercials in Hollywood for 3 decades and worked w film crews, I know a crap production when I read about it. No way they could have gotten away with that stuff back in Los Angeles, btw. 

[hobbes2702 13498]

7 minutes ago, TreatyOak said:

I do know. His lack of funding set the stage for a half-ass production. Hence, they were forced to hire frighteningly under-qualified people like Hannah. And, when the crew started quitting due to safety issues and the fact that they pulling double-shifts on half a night's sleep (cause they forced to stay in shite motels an hour and a half away), they didn't replace them. They simply increased the responsibilities of the remaining crew, like placing Hannah on props AND firearms, which is way outside film union standards. Now if he was back in Hollywood not really understanding what was going on, I could sort-of accept it, although it's a violation of the union. But he was there every day watching his little shit-show unfold. 

I don't have anything personally against him, but as someone who made TV commercials in Hollywood for 3 decades and worked w film crews, I know a crap production when I read about it. No way they could have gotten away with that stuff back in Los Angeles, btw. 

What are you talking about “his” lack of funding? It’s a low budget non studio movie. Of course they don’t have a ton of money.

Not having studio money doesn’t mean they were forced to hire someone unqualified either. They hired poorly. Simple as.

Whats really amazing about your argument though is that your first sentence is the only one that that directly implicates Baldwin to the problem. You had to use they for everything else because even you know it wasn’t Alec Baldwin’s fault that the production was what it was.

Why do you still act like he was in charge of the set?

Edited April 21, 2023 by hobbes2702

[DigglerontheHoof 21561]

Slap fights over Alec Baldwin.  Surly to the bone.

[TreatyOak 17404]

5 minutes ago, hobbes2702 said:

What are you talking about “his” lack of funding? It’s a low budget non studio movie. Of course they don’t have a ton of money.

Not having studio money doesn’t mean they were forced to hire someone unqualified either. They hired poorly. Simple as.

Whats really amazing about your argument though is that your first sentence is the only one that that directly implicates Baldwin to the problem. You had to use they for everything else because even you know it wasn’t Alec Baldwin’s fault that the production was what it was.

Why do you still act like he was in charge of the set?

Working for big ad agencies, we made huge-budget commercials with A-level directors and yes, all the way down to shite productions. It's always about the money. You get what you pay for. They got Hannah cause they could pay her like a PA. They didn't hire her father. for a reason. They got burned. I've gotten burned before making commercials when our budget didn't meet the vision but we tried to make do. Thankfully, there were never firearms on set but people did get hurt. We almost had a stunt driver plow through our video village due to a lack of organization. His skill prevented what would have been a massacre. 

Baldwin was the executive director, the Hollywood star of the movie, and he was on set. Trust me, he was in charge.   

[WhatTheBuck 28937]

15 minutes ago, TreatyOak said:

I don't have anything personally against him

Really? Because I get the impression that you do. You seem to be more eager to pin blame on him than seems warranted and when someone disagrees with you, you accuse them of conferring upon Baldwin “hero” status. That seems like a sort of reverse projection. 

[hobbes2702 13498]

4 minutes ago, TreatyOak said:

Working for big ad agencies, we made huge-budget commercials with A-level directors and yes, all the way down to shite productions. It's always about the money. You get what you pay for. They got Hannah cause they could pay her like a PA. They didn't hire her father. for a reason. They got burned. I've gotten burned before making commercials when our budget didn't meet the vision but we tried to make do. Thankfully, there were never firearms on set but people did get hurt. We almost had a stunt driver plow through our video village due to a lack of organization. His skill prevented what would have been a massacre. 

Baldwin was the executive director, the Hollywood star of the movie, and he was on set. Trust me, he was in charge.   

I don’t trust you about that because he absolutely wasn’t. 
Enjoy the hate brigade I guess. 

[TreatyOak 17404]

15 minutes ago, hobbes2702 said:

I don’t trust you about that because he absolutely wasn’t. 
Enjoy the hate brigade I guess. 

It's been real tough. I even got negged once! #thoughtsandprayers

Why people are defending him is beyond me but okay. 

[Nivek 17420]

3 hours ago, C-Man said:

It likely will be for the armorer.

This is the way

[hobbes2702 13498]

13 minutes ago, TreatyOak said:

It's been real tough. I even got negged once! #thoughtsandprayers

Why people are defending him is beyond me but okay. 

Because you’re just factually wrong in assigning blame because you don’t like him.

I don’t like him either, he’s a douchebag of the highest order. Doesn’t change the facts of what happened 

[otisdog 365]

37 minutes ago, TreatyOak said:

Baldwin was the executive director, the Hollywood star of the movie, and he was on set. Trust me, he was in charge.   

For someone who has made numerous commercials, you don't seem to be very observant about what was happening on set. The 1st Assistant Director  runs the set. Executive directors have nothing to do with on-set operations. Same goes for the talent.

[WhatTheBuck 28937]

32 minutes ago, TreatyOak said:

Why people are defending him is beyond me but okay. 

I never thought it was reasonable to expect him to know, suspect, or check to see if there were real bullets in the prop gun he had on the set. It was a horrible accident but the idea that Baldwin should be blamed for shooting someone never made sense to me. Seems the judge agrees. What’s so hard to fathom about that?

[Da Fino 2820]

5 hours ago, henrygandorf said:

it would've been sooooooo much better for them if he was outside his lane, checking the gun "for safety purposes" and it went off and killed/injured someone.  we never would've heard the end of "you see, the way it works on a film set, is that only person who handles the blah blah stupid libs".

In that situation I definitely would have been fine with them throwing the book at him. These were dumb charges. 

[SquishMitten 10497]

20 hours ago, TreatyOak said:

No one has yet addressed the issue I raised, which is that Baldwin admitted to the police in his very first interrogation that he didn't check the weapon because he didn't want to insult the armorer.

Here are his exact words to the police:
"She (the armorer) said, 'do you want to check?' I didn't want to insult her. I've never had a problem. I'm good."

It sure seems to me that his original admission is grounds for criminal negligence. Later, he amended his story to that the Assistant Director handed him the gun and told him it was safe. 

I believe the local New Mexico justice system felt that they had strong legal grounds to indict him. Aside from the enormous legal resources he no-doubt employed, the state may have felt pressure to not piss off Hollywood, as New Mexico is dependant on the film industry for revenue. 

This short video summarises the exchange well, as well as discusses the danger of talking to the police without a lawyer. However, I've seen the entire interview and that is exactly what he says. 

  

That could also be used to show it wasn’t negligent. He could be saying “this person has a flawless record, I consider her the best in the business. If she says it’s good, then everyone knows it’s good. I’m just an actor, not a trained specialist. We’re taught to rely on the specialists. In what world would I think I knew more than her?”

[RomaVicta 30612]

2 hours ago, TreatyOak said:

Working for big ad agencies, we made huge-budget commercials with A-level directors and yes, all the way down to shite productions. It's always about the money.

I can see you're a real mover and shaker. Advertisement production is the same as film production. You know your shit, man.

Sorry the neg was so stinging. Find tougher heroes.

[TreatyOak 17404]

13 hours ago, RomaVicta said:

I can see you're a real mover and shaker. Advertisement production is the same as film production. You know your shit, man.

Sorry the neg was so stinging. Find tougher heroes.

I shot commercials with Hollywood movie directors, too, including David Fincher, (who was actually very nice) David Dobkin (also very nice) and French director Luc Besson, (who sexually harrassed our American producer throughout the shoot) as well as others. It's not that different if it's a big budget commercial and crews in Hollywood are the same folks.

Remind me again about your area of expertise in film production. 

13 hours ago, SquishMitten said:

That could also be used to show it wasn’t negligent. He could be saying “this person has a flawless record, I consider her the best in the business. If she says it’s good, then everyone knows it’s good. I’m just an actor, not a trained specialist. We’re taught to rely on the specialists. In what world would I think I knew more than her?”

I think that is a good point. 

[YGIFS 19458]

Alec Baldwin was pardoned by Governor Abbott to combat the backlash he was getting for announcing a pardon for Daniel Perry.  

Click here to donate $25 to legally fight this.  

[TreatyOak 17404]

Along with the culpability of shooting a weapon at someone and killing them, I have also been mentioning that he was ultimately responsible for an unsafe production due to it's underfunding and was on-set closely involved on a daily basis. In my opinion, he can be seen as being culpable along with our unqualified armorer who is still charged, and the AD, who plea-bargained his way out.

Many of you recall the Station nightclub fire in Rhode Island that killed a large number of people due to the band shooting off pyrotechnics and catching the place on fire. The two owners of the club did not start the fire, (the band manager did) but were charged because they operated an unsafe environment with illegal, flammable materials, plus had a key exit door illegally locked. They pleaded guilty and one went to prison for several years. (The other got 500 community hours.) Baldwin was ultimately responsible for a movie that was being handled in an unsafe way, where several key crew members had previously quit due to safety issues and were not replaced, where the remaining crews were doing twice as much work with little sleep, AND he was at the shoot (no pun intended) AND he shot the gun he was invited to check (his words) that killed a woman and injured another person. In my opinion, he can be rightfully charged and probably would be if he didn't have some big-time lawyers.

To the people who claim he wasn't "in charge," I can assure you that every night after they wrapped, he and the AD, other producers, etc, had a meeting to go over all the production issues and discussed the various financial and production hurdles. Here, he had full control over the half-ass ways they were handling things, like making inexperienced Hannah double-up as the props person, a role they assigned her after the other props person walked. She claimed she wasn't allowed to stay with the guns and had to run off to handle props. This is probably why she is currently counter-suing him.