Crime Charges Re-Filed against Alec Baldwin in 'Rust' Shooting. (Update: Armorer's Trial Started)

Basically the easy way to draw the line is to find Baldwin, the actor, innocent, and Baldwin, the producer, guilty.

Either way, the armorer should do jail time for being criminally negligent.
 
Live rounds being fired on the set is nuts to me. Thats just asking for an accident. There are a bunch of people that are negligent and should be charged. If it can be shown that Baldwin was aware of the live rounds on set, he has to be charged.
 
In something of a bizarre twist, most of the armorer's phone records will be sealed due to a reasonable expectation of "physical harm, intimidation, and embarrassment" in relation to some of the things found. Now I'm curious as to what it could be.

www.yahoo.com

‘Rust’ Armorer Hannah Gutierrez-Reed May Face Risk Of ‘Physical Harm’ From Public Disclosure Of Phone Records

Armorer Hannah Gutierrez-Reed is finally going to be judged by a jury of her peers following the shooting on the set of the Western film “Rust” in October 2021. Although the trial was originally scheduled for December 2023, it was postponed to February 2024 reportedly due to conflicting...
www.yahoo.com www.yahoo.com
 
KnockoutsGalore said:
In something of a bizarre twist, most of the armorer's phone records will be sealed due to a reasonable expectation of "physical harm, intimidation, and embarrassment" in relation to some of the things found. Now I'm curious as to what it could be.

www.yahoo.com

‘Rust’ Armorer Hannah Gutierrez-Reed May Face Risk Of ‘Physical Harm’ From Public Disclosure Of Phone Records

Armorer Hannah Gutierrez-Reed is finally going to be judged by a jury of her peers following the shooting on the set of the Western film “Rust” in October 2021. Although the trial was originally scheduled for December 2023, it was postponed to February 2024 reportedly due to conflicting...
www.yahoo.com www.yahoo.com
Click to expand...
So she teh nudes and or sexually explicit photos and videos that they do not want people having access to?
 
KnockoutsGalore said:
But why would that cause her physical harm? I think it might be something a bit more nefarious than that.
Click to expand...
If there are nudes of her and others that she would not be with it could cause her harm or maybe it has video of her doing blow off Baldwins manhood. Who knows what it is but I would think it would be some dirty stuff if they don’t want to release it
 
I really don't understand this.
Shouldn't an actor be able to rely on the fact that the weaponexpert doesn't hand him a gun with live ammo in it ??
If actors are responsable then there is no need for weaponexperts in the first place because the actors would have to become weaponexperts just in case.
Why would someone who is not an expert be responsable ?
What am I missing here ?
 
Chappi said:
I really don't understand this.
Shouldn't an actor be able to rely on the fact that the weaponexpert doesn't hand him a gun with live ammo in it ??
If actors are responsable then there is no need for weaponexperts in the first place because the actors would have to become weaponexperts just in case.
Why would someone who is not an expert be responsable ?
What am I missing here ?
Click to expand...
Anyone using a gun needs to know about gun safety, that’s all there really is to it don’t overthink it.
 
Chappi said:
I really don't understand this.
Shouldn't an actor be able to rely on the fact that the weaponexpert doesn't hand him a gun with live ammo in it ??
If actors are responsable then there is no need for weaponexperts in the first place because the actors would have to become weaponexperts just in case.
Why would someone who is not an expert be responsable ?
What am I missing here ?
Click to expand...

I believe it's a couple of things. One is was he in the script supposed to fire the weapon in their direction if not then no matter what was in the gun his actions were reckless. Then of he was a producer and/or overseeing or in charge of the set if he was supposed to discharge the weapon in their why were slandered safety precautions not taken. If he was just some "dumb" actor and following directions having nothing to do with anything else it would be different.
 
KnockoutsGalore said:
That was some of my first thought. Or that anything sexually explicit may be considered uncouth, or blur the lines of legality.
Click to expand...
Maybe she makes some edgier shoops in the heavies like brother @Buff and she'd be embarassed for the world to see how many templates she has of Bethe Correira's pancreas?

<seedat>
 
im kinda indifferent on baldwins actions. As a producer with tons of experience in hollywood, he should be held liable for unsafe practices i suppose. But as for the armorer, she definitely sounds guilty as fuck. I mean her argument is that she was over tasked and not allowed proper time for training. However, if she is on drugs and not keeping the set safe and allowing for live rounds to be accesible, I dont give a damn how overworked she was, thats on her.
 
moreorless87 said:
I don't think you can ignore the politics, its clearly become a partisan issue and a previous prosecutor who pushed the case went on to stand for office as a republican, the fact its going ahead I wouldn't trust as a sign of the case being strong against him.
Click to expand...
Does it matter? Dude admitted to skipping out on a safety check, something he’s required to do. It was in the interrogation before he lawyered up.
 
chardog said:
Does it matter? Dude admitted to skipping out on a safety check, something he’s required to do. It was in the interrogation before he lawyered up.
Click to expand...
I think it does potentially in terms of whether charges being filed is a guide to whether they think the case is winnable.

Was Baldwin as an actor under a legal requirement to check the weapon? I can't say I'm an expert but my understanding is that's the armourers job, an expert(or should be) in the field.

To me the way this case is being pushed doesnt seem like they have a smoking gun so to speak, it doesnt seem to be focusing on one action by Baldwin which was clearly culpable but rather shifting around making a lot of different claims, first it was whether he pulled the trigger, then it was whether he was liable as a producer, then it was his failiure to check the gun.
 
chardog said:
for the sake of argument, lets say the armorer fucked up and put in a live round. That doesnt make her responsible if Alec chose to skip the inspection protocol, That doesnt make her responsible for pointing the gun at someone point blank, that doesnt make her responsible for pulling the trigger.
Click to expand...

You gotta be joking. Yes it does. In this scenario she introduced a live round to what was supposed to be a controlled environment. I don't think the points you're making hold any legal relevance. The armorer is literally the expert on set.
 
Last edited:
irish_thug said:
Could be similar to the Brandon Lee scenario.
Click to expand...
I don't think so. As I understand it, and it's been awhile, Lee died because a gun was test fired and a piece of shrapnel had been left behind or something. So then when the blank fired, it propelled the shrapnel and thats what killed him.

Again, it's been awhile So I could be wrong. But this situation was literally a live round loaded into the gun and fired.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
1,237,392
Messages
55,487,999
Members
174,787
Latest member
nicenhot

Share this page

Back
Top