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?
New forensic analysis of the gun used by Alec Baldwin demonstrates that there was no malfunction, he had to have pulled the trigger
- Thread starter old lady new shooter
- Start date
- Status
Ignition Override
Member
What a terrible way to retire from the business, for both good old Alec
...and the lady armorer, soon with Too much free time To Think, and Reflect (and everybody recognizes you):
--having been part of a cruel irony whereby these people would have been against gun safety Classes in Public Schools.
This mindset must have contributed to their iron-clad assumptions that their Set Armorer couldn't make a mistake--all the while everybody knowing that live ammo had been nearby.
It reminds me of the catastrophe in Maui. How can everything go wrong in both situations, with multiple so-called safeguards?
...and the lady armorer, soon with Too much free time To Think, and Reflect (and everybody recognizes you):--having been part of a cruel irony whereby these people would have been against gun safety Classes in Public Schools.
This mindset must have contributed to their iron-clad assumptions that their Set Armorer couldn't make a mistake--all the while everybody knowing that live ammo had been nearby.
It reminds me of the catastrophe in Maui. How can everything go wrong in both situations, with multiple so-called safeguards?
Last edited:
Outlaw75
Member
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?
doubleh
Member
The state had do something to make the masses think they were interested in this. IMO it was like taking a flyswatter to a hornets nest. I live here and know how the law works. Or doesn't if you have money---- unless you happen to be an oil production company.
Last edited:
doubleh
Member
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?
I would think that Hanna Reed was negligent and will plead or be tried. And the AP has already pleaded. I would like to see a trial so we would find out more but do not see it happening. Since I do not think it matters a whit whether Alex "pulled the trigger" or not I do not think he will be recharged. I thought the trigger statement was really dumb when he made it but now see it as a stroke of genius. He sees to have totally confused and misdirected the investigators with that statement.
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.
Most likely he pulled the trigger back and was attempting to lower the hammer without firing the gun. Unless the trigger was also being held back, I don't see how it could have fired even if it slipped off his thumb. There may be some guns that allow that but I'm not aware of them. All that I've used would take the hammer to half-cock if he released the trigger after he started to lower the hammer.
To be honest this is one of the more difficult type of guns to de-cock and is easy to mess up even for veteran gun owners. Same with most lever action rifles. They have a well-known reputation for unintentional discharges when unloading or de-cocking and why both Marlin and Winchester started putting hammer block safeties on them.
Most actors aren't particularly gun savvy. And when we witness something traumatic our minds often see and remember things the way we want to remember them. He probably honestly believes he did not pull the trigger.
Ultimately whoever was responsible for a live round in the gun is most responsible for this. Alec Baldwin the actor I don't blame. Actors have been firing real guns with blanks in them on TV and movie sets for over 100 years. They depend on the crew to make sure the guns are loaded with blanks. It is pretty common and there have been at least 2 other deaths and some injuries over the years. But Alec Baldwin producer could be held responsible.
To be honest this is one of the more difficult type of guns to de-cock and is easy to mess up even for veteran gun owners. Same with most lever action rifles. They have a well-known reputation for unintentional discharges when unloading or de-cocking and why both Marlin and Winchester started putting hammer block safeties on them.
Most actors aren't particularly gun savvy. And when we witness something traumatic our minds often see and remember things the way we want to remember them. He probably honestly believes he did not pull the trigger.
Ultimately whoever was responsible for a live round in the gun is most responsible for this. Alec Baldwin the actor I don't blame. Actors have been firing real guns with blanks in them on TV and movie sets for over 100 years. They depend on the crew to make sure the guns are loaded with blanks. It is pretty common and there have been at least 2 other deaths and some injuries over the years. But Alec Baldwin producer could be held responsible.
Legally, no.
He shot the vicim.
Yeah, but--even though the audience is led to believe that those guns are pointed at people when they are fired, they are not.
Dudedog
Contributing Member
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......
old lady new shooter
Member
- Joined
- Apr 26, 2015
- Messages
- 30,665
I was referring to the Brandon Lee case described by Roval in post 22.
doubleh
Member
Pardon me. What I said about Hanna Reed still goes though. If anyone is convicted and receives more than a suspended sentence it will be her.
doubleh
Member
Not a difficult thing to do in this state but--------if they are out to get you they will unless you can afford a smart attorney. It appears Baldwin can.
JR24
Member
And in Baldwins interview he acknowledged that pointing the gun at someone and pulling the trigger was forbidden for a real gun. He showed, IMO, plenty of knowledge of the danger of firearms on the set in his interview.
Enough to push for criminal charges for negligence.
I blame Alex Baldwin. I disagree waving responsibility because, the man is a clown, the man is an actor, the man had a toe ache and his mom was mad at him, his dog kept him up all night and the Chinese food he had the night before gave in the runs. Etc, etc. Alex Baldwin is an actor, and was also in charge. The in charge part means he is responsible for all failures on the set, some of which were his by creating an unsafe working environment. If Alex Baldwin was unable to act, and create a safe working environment, then maybe he ought to have quit one of his jobs. Not everyone can walk and chew gum at the same time.
As Dirty Harry said:
lsudave
Member
- Joined
- Feb 10, 2007
- Messages
- 1,042
That's the part that is not cut and dried, from what I remember...
There 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.
If Baldwin's "practicing the scene" was specific enough that he was "on his mark", meaning he was located where he was intended to be, and pointing the gun where he was supposed to, then cast and crew are supposed to not be downrange of him. That's on the director to ensure it's clear. If Baldwin could see her... but we don't know that. The report I read said that the bullet went through a moniter, and struck her in the chest. Not a laptop, a monitor. So, a workstation set up out of the camera POV. Now, I've got a cheap 32" monitor, if it's set up in a room and someone 30 ft away, sitting on a bench (which is what I read) facing it, they may well not see me.
If you make the assertion that he intended to point the firearm that direction, and also assert that he a) does not see a person downrange, and b) well-established rules state nobody is to be there when they do that- it really complicates things.
- Actor is supposed to point prop at point A
- Prop is not supposed to be a loaded firearm
- Point A is supposed to be clear, regardless
- Actor did not see crew member in point A region, behind an object that conceals her from Actor's vision
- Director (or whoever is in charge of the scene) does NOT announce that stage is HOT, or is NOT COLD (I don't know what the protocol is, you would think they don't move to step 1 until SOMETHING is stated).
2 and 3 are both SUPPOSED to be set in stone; you're basically operating in good faith on that.
4 is the part that gives Actor protection from prosecution. 5 could enhance the Actor's defense, through negligence that puts Director at fault; or could hang Actor if it's established Director DID call Stop, or DID NOT call GO (whatever they're supposed to do).
If everyone is operating that the room is ready, and she wanders over into line of (what they supposed was imaginary) line of fire, then her getting shot is a terrible accident. What little I understood of her actions, I think she was trying to 'eyeball' the scene and get the camera lined just right. Sounds like a terrible logistics layout, and cutting corners to save time (and money) in lining things up remotely.
I have no attachment to Baldwin, think he's an ass from what I've heard. But if he's in good faith pointing a prop in a direction he's assured is 'safe', his prop goes BANG!, that would be scary and shocking enough. To then see someone fall over with a gunshot, in the direction he shot, was told it was clear and he didn't see her behind the equipment over there, that would be surreal and sickening beyond comprehension. "Why did this shoot? YOU TOLD ME IT WAS CLEAR. WHAT IS SHE DOING OVER THERE?!?"
You got it.t
Mizar
Member
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.
As for the non firing replica being present - if this is true, than the assistant director is to blame, because the armorer (Hannah Reed) was not on the set by the time of the incident.
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".
Last edited:
It is.
jmorris
Member
- Joined
- Sep 30, 2005
- Messages
- 24,236
Not really.
Unfortunately destruction of evidence by our top law enforcement agency in the USA, isn’t either…
Outlaw75
Member
Yes, that was the outcome of the investigation into Brandon Lee's death, I remember reading about it at the time. The film's property master was also acting as armorer. There were budget shortfalls at the time and he got the idea that he could save a few bucks by making dummy rounds out of commercially available ammo. He apparently did not know too much about cartridge construction because he did not disable or fire the primers. What I will understand is how he failed to notice that one of the dummies was missing its bullet when he reloaded the gun with blanks.
scaatylobo
Member
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.
Mizar
Member
My mistake - I somehow skipped the Brandon Lee part and thought that the quote was concerning "Rust"...
Outlaw75
Member
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.
Full video in this report from the BBC. Jump to 0:25 if you don't want to watch all of the report.
- Status
