Alec Baldwin

[boji]

https://www.ny-criminal-defense-lawyer.com/manslaughter-vs-criminally-negligent-homicide/

Some casts and crews have gone through hell to remain true to a story. Fitzcarraldo comes to mind. Apocalypse Now.
Should good cinema court danger/violence when it's part of the subject matter?

 

[Tubetec]

We could have movie violence sanitised and perpetrated by fairy like gay men running around with pink guns too , sounds more scarey to be honest though.

 

[Tubetec]

We cant undo whats done either , great movies like Dr Strangelove, Mean Streets, Taxi driver , Woody Harrellson in NBK , its all based on the premise that I have more fire power than you so I win , its only a mirror image or reflection of the nations attitude to war .

 

[JohnRoberts]

More verbiege from Alec's TV blame deflection interview.

"I cock the gun. I go, 'Can you see that? Can you see that? Can you see that?'" Baldwin said. "And then I let go of the hammer of the gun, and the gun goes off. I let go of the hammer of the gun, the gun goes off."

This sounds a little more possible and consistent with him claiming to not pull the trigger.

JR

 

[crazydoc]

Except you can't uncock the gun without pulling the trigger, unless the gun was defective (and I'm sure that's been well studied), or he didn't have it fully cocked yet and let go of the hammer prematurely while it was pointed at people.

Still, the important missing piece is where did that live round come from (target practice by the crew?)

 

[JohnRoberts]

There is not just one single responsible or culpable party... A handful of people on the set are guilty of dropping the ball on firearm safety. Baldwin is on the hook for two different responsibilities, first as the film's co-producer he was responsible for set safety, and more importantly as the man holding the weapon. While other's also had direct responsibility as part of their job function (like armorer), and yet others contributed to the dangerous situation (playing with the guns), as has been shared ad nauseam.

I am still sorry he had this unpleasant experience but somewhat less sorry after this blatant attempt to deflect blame and lobby for sympathy in the court of public opinion. The optimist in me is looking for an upside, but if he continues to downplay the responsibility of everyone handling weapons to be vigilant about every weapon's armed status, this may not increase gun safety awareness. Throwing one or more low level set workers under the bus will not accomplish much for public safety.

He could even save a few lives by being a man and admitting that he screwed up by failing to clear the gun himself. I'm sure his lawyer's head would explode if he admitted anything close to that.

JR

 

[fallout]

“No. Someone is responsible for what happened and I can’t say who that is, but I know it’s not me.” -Alec Baldwin

You've got to be kidding me?

 

[pucho812]

More verbiege from Alec's TV blame deflection interview.



This sounds a little more possible and consistent with him claiming to not pull the trigger.

JR

let see, in a double action revolver I can squeeze the trigger it will automatically pull the hammer back and fire it, I can also cock the hammer back locking it and then I can pull the trigger releasing the hammer. in a double action there are 2 lock positions on the hammer, fully cocked back, and a position just shortly have the hammer comes back. You have to pull the trigger to release them from both. if by chance I release the hammer without being in the locked position, it should catch the position right after you start to pull the hammer back helping prevent an accidental firing. In a single action, as the one used on film, You have one position where the hammer will lock, that is when it is pulled back completely. If you release the hammer before it is locked for whatever reason, then he would be right in saying he didn't pull the trigger and the gun went off. unlike a double action there is no second position to stop the hammer before striking the bullet. However in this case, he still was in possession of the firearm in his hand, he still had it pointed at people and it went off. not pulling the trigger does not absolve you from any legal action both criminal and civil. The gun was in his hand.
While as much as I don't care for alec these days, I would not wish anyone including him to be in this position.

 

[pucho812]

Elephant in the room? In the u.s. a person has a right to remain silent, this is especially crucial during an ongoing investigation. It’s not an admission of guilt, it’s not anything other then a persons legal right to keep their mouth shut. So considering this is still ongoing afaik, why on earth would he go on t.v. And do an interview about the whole thing?

 

[JohnRoberts]

Elephant in the room? In the u.s. a person has a right to remain silent, this is especially crucial during an ongoing investigation. It’s not an admission of guilt, it’s not anything other then a persons legal right to keep their mouth shut. So considering this is still ongoing afaik, why on earth would he go on t.v. And do an interview about the whole thing?

He must think he is serving his own self interest in the court of public opinion. It is disrespectful to the woman he killed unintentionally. Few people with half a clue accept his "the gun did it" defense.

Worthy of inspection is how his story has evolved. I can't imagine any lawyer authorizing a client in that situation to do a TV interview no matter how friendly, including mood music.

I am waiting to see how SNL deals with this (not really, I haven't watched SNL for years).

JR

 

[cyrano]

What's SNL?

 

[JohnRoberts]

What's SNL?

Saturday Night Live... it was (is?) a very popular sketch comedy show in something like it's 45th season... IMO it was funnier back then, but so was I.

The world used to stop on saturday nights to watch it... I recall being at house parties back a few decades ago when the party would stop and everybody would gather around the TV set to watch that week's show.

In recent years Baldwin played a recurring character on SNL doing a parody of President Trump.

JR

 

[cyrano]

Ah, thx, John.

I know SNL, from YouTube, of course, since I don't watch TV.

 

[pucho812]

He must think he is serving his own self interest in the court of public opinion. It is disrespectful to the woman he killed unintentionally. Few people with half a clue accept his "the gun did it" defense.

Worthy of inspection is how his story has evolved. I can't imagine any lawyer authorizing a client in that situation to do a TV interview no matter how friendly, including mood music.

I am waiting to see how SNL deals with this (not really, I haven't watched SNL for years).

JR

I can’t imagine any lawyer with any legal degree and common sense allowing it. It’s not admission of guilt to keep your mouth shut. Even if his lawyer said ok go on t.v., it will not absolve any criminal charges or any civil lawsuits that may happen. Court of public opinion does not matter in a court of law.

 

[JohnRoberts]

I can’t imagine any lawyer with any legal degree and common sense allowing it. It’s not admission of guilt to keep your mouth shut. Even if his lawyer said ok go on t.v., it will not absolve any criminal charges or any civil lawsuits that may happen. Court of public opinion does not matter in a court of law.

Not only am I not a doctor, but I am not a lawyer either so caveat lector.

I don't think Alec was at much risk of criminal indictment (unless he admits to something even more stupid on TV), so his legal advice is probably limited to entertainment lawyers (agents) and he is more worried about getting his next gig, than getting arrested.

JR

 

[pucho812]

Not only am I not a doctor, but I am not a lawyer either so caveat lector.

I don't think Alec was at much risk of criminal indictment (unless he admits to something even more stupid on TV), so his legal advice is probably limited to entertainment lawyers (agents) and he is more worried about getting his next gig, than getting arrested.

JR

I concur.

 

[JohnRoberts]

Just saw an article revealing that there are multiple versions of what happened coming from all involved.

Of possible interest:

- The rehearsal with the handgun was not scheduled so armorer was not present that morning to clear weapon and advise against pointing it at anybody.
- The vendor who supplied the weapons claims that they did not provide any live loads. There should not have been any live ammo on that set.
-The local prosecutor has said that criminal charges are "not" off the table.

I am not sure that anything actually criminal happened on that set, but some serious negligence (stupidity?) is in evidence, with competing versions of reality being presented by different cast and crew members.

Again a very unfortunate incident that I hope we can learn something useful from after the finger pointing runs it's course.

JR

 

[Tubetec]

Right to remain silent is one thing , key witnesses going on tv or making other public anouncements before a possible legal case has been answered before a court could be prejudicial if it comes to finding jurors later on . Even if he only faces a grand jury appearance to explain himself the whole thing has a taint of predjudice now , and it stinks to high heaven.

 

[JohnRoberts]

Right to remain silent is one thing , key witnesses going on tv or making other public anouncements before a possible legal case has been answered before a court could be prejudicial if it comes to finding jurors later on . Even if he only faces a grand jury appearance to explain himself the whole thing has a taint of predjudice now , and it stinks to high heaven.

It is certainly not very smart, but not illegal.

JR

 

[Matador]

It's certainly possible that a sear could be worn enough to let go under very little trigger pressure (even just slightly back to the side). I would think it's the armorer's job to make sure this isn't the case.

People are saying that Baldwin is either lying and pulled the trigger, or that the gun fired itself. It's certainly possible that Baldwin has no memory of pulling the trigger: memory during stressful events isn't the most reliable...

...which is why I'm shocked there aren't multiple camera angles that show exactly what happened. On most film sets there's often multiple people running around recording everything that happens (good stuff for the DVD extras).