roval
Member
a negligence lawsuit was settled against the studio. this is where Alec Baldwin being the producer is vulnerable.
Was the person who "rigged" the live rounds prosecuted?
a negligence lawsuit was settled against the studio. this is where Alec Baldwin being the producer is vulnerable.
Was the person who "rigged" the live rounds prosecuted?
The crazy part about that incident is that at one point an actor dropped the hammer on the revolver (44 mag, I think) during a close up where he was supposed to be pointing the gun at Brandon Lee. Since the prop master/armorer had only dumped out the powder and the primed cases were still live when he put the bullets back in, it must've made some sort of sound when the primer went off. Then he pulled the "dummies" out and loaded blanks in the gun for the next scene, but didn't notice that one of the "dummies" was an empty case. The primer had lodged the bullet in the bore and the blank finished the job when they started filming and the actor "fired" at Brandon Lee. I mean how do you not realize that you had 6 rounds with bullets and now you only have 5? How did no one hear the primer pop when the hammer got dropped?At some point, one of the tips would unknowingly come detached from the cartridge and lodge itself within the barrel or cylinder of the handgun."
The fine wasn't for the shooting, it was for not investigating the reported previous incidents.
She still has charges pending. Notice what I said in my first post about her being at the bottom of the hill.
Was the person who "rigged" the live rounds prosecuted?
Regardless of what the shooter says or thinks about the what made the firearm discharge, if a person points a firarme at someone without lawful justification and it discharges, a the crime with which Baldwin was charged has been committed.Since I do not think it matters a whit whether Alex "pulled the trigger" or not
Legally, no.Ultimately whoever was responsible for a live round in the gun is most responsible for this.
He shot the vicim.Alec Baldwin the actor I don't blame.
Yeah, but--even though the audience is led to believe that those guns are pointed at people when they are fired, they are not.Actors have been firing real guns with blanks in them on TV and movie sets for over 100 years.
My father always taught me to never assume a gun was unloaded until I checked it, no matter how many people had handled it/checked it before......if the script says to shoot a person then the gun better have blanks and that is not up to the actor to make sure it does.
I was referring to the Brandon Lee case described by Roval in post 22.She still has charges pending. Notice what I said in my first post about her being at the bottom of the hill.
He sees to have totally confused and misdirected the investigators with that statement.
Yeah, but--even though the audience is led to believe that those guns are pointed at people when they are fired, they are not.
Alec Baldwin the actor I don't blame.
That's the part that is not cut and dried, from what I remember...Regardless of what the shooter says or thinks about the what made the firearm discharge, if a person points a firarme at someone without lawful justification and it discharges, a the crime with which Baldwin was charged has been committed.
You got it.tThere are multiple protocols in the film industry when it comes to handling firearms. One is that you never point one (even a blank shooter, from what I remember) at a person. Camera angles and cuts will handle that. That includes a cameraman... if you point at the camera, that camera is supposed to be operated by remote.
I believe that story was not confirmed in this particular case, but it's a valid practice in the US - that way you get actors, who have not fired a real firearm, to get accustomed to the recoil, sound, blast... So they will represent it more realistically when firing blanks - it's up to the director and the actor, if they are willing to do so. But it's the armorer's job to make sure that no live ammo is present on set, ever. As one US prop-master once said to me: "If you ever gonna do this, you better make sure those rounds are clearly marked, locked and away - I don't want any of this sh*t anywhere near the set"... In the US you are not required to have a barrel obstruction for blank firing conversions (unless needed for operation of the firearm), so a stock handgun was used - we, in my "neck of woods", do this with live firearms on a shooting range, because we are forbidden to shoot on private land and every blank firing conversion must have a barrel obstruction making it incapable of shooting live ammo without destroying the firearm - in other words, we cannot just use the "movie guns" on some nearby property for target practice. But if they did is simply because they were bored, then the armorer is to take the full blame for allowing such a stupidity.Then after the shootting, stories came out that bored crew members were taking live-firing prop guns and shooting cans with live ammo.
Do we have a confirmation for that story, or it's just someone's imagination working? In general, this is not far from the truth, concerning making of dummy rounds - the preferred way is: you take a real cartridge case, then a real bullet. Instead of powder, you put one or two plastic/steel BBs to rattle when the cartridge is shaken (acoustic confirmation). In the primer pocket a machined solid brass plug is inserted to mimic the appearance of a live primer - it can take several firing pin strikes without showing it too much. A fired primer can be used, or no primer at all, but it will show if you have close up shots at the back of the "dummies"."During the scene, the gun was loaded with "dummy" cartridges, which are used for close-up shots because they contain the actual projectile on the end of the cartridge but contain no gunpowder. (It looks more realistic if the camera can see the bullet tips in the pistol's cylinders.) It seems that the prop department didn't have any of these "dummy" cartridges on hand, so rather than shut down the production for the night, some Bozo decided that he'd "rig" some of the live rounds. They removed the gunpowder from the cartridges and replaced the bullet tips, thereby giving them the "dummy' rounds that were needed for the close-up shots. At some point, one of the tips would unknowingly come detached from the cartridge and lodge itself within the barrel or cylinder of the handgun."
It is.That's the part that is not cut and dried, from what I remember...
Not really.Surprise!
Unfortunately destruction of evidence by our top law enforcement agency in the USA, isn’t either…So a forensic company was engaged who replaced the parts broken by the FBI…
Do we have a confirmation for that story, or it's just someone's imagination working? In general, this is not far from the truth, concerning making of dummy rounds - the preferred way is: you take a real cartridge case, then a real bullet. Instead of powder, you put one or two plastic/steel BBs to rattle when the cartridge is shaken (acoustic confirmation). In the primer pocket a machined solid brass plug is inserted to mimic the appearance of a live primer - it can take several firing pin strikes without showing it too much. A fired primer can be used, or no primer at all, but it will show if you have close up shots at the back of the "dummies".
A couple of months ago when we read that the case had been dismissed, that was not exactly accurate. The prosecutors at the time said additional investigation was needed and that they might reopen the case depending on the results. So a forensic company was engaged who replaced the parts broken by the FBI and determined that the gun did NOT malfunction, the trigger had to have been pulled, Baldwin's claims to the contrary notwithstanding.
This has been reported by Epoch Times at https://www.theepochtimes.com/us/alec-baldwin-could-face-charges-after-new-forensic-report-5470140 if you have a subscription, or by ABC posting an AP story at https://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory...fatal-shooting-cinematographer-alec-102299848.
My mistake - I somehow skipped the Brandon Lee part and thought that the quote was concerning "Rust"...Yes, that was the outcome of the investigation into Brandon Lee's death, I remember reading about it at the time.
The video was made during the incident as part of the process of framing the scene (which is why the cinematographer and the director were both behind the camera). As you say, he was drawing the pistol and simultaneously cocking it. Depending on which version of the video you saw (I don't think the US media every showed the full video) you can see Baldwin point the gun off to the side, pull the trigger and ride the hammer down with his thumb. Apparently they went through multiple iterations of this as they tried different angles. It can only be assumed that as some point Baldwin must've been careless in handling the gun and did not point it in a safe direction when he was lowering the hammer. I think that being the case his is guilty at a minimum of negligence.Of note is the video PRIOR to him shooting that poor lady.
In that video he is shown COCKING the hammer of that single action pistol AND pulling the trigger !!
That alone should prove his guilt,and do not forget that he had to aim/point that gun at her.
And not the camera where is SHOULD have been pointed for that shot.