Alec Baldwin

[JohnRoberts]

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).

Supposedly this was an unscheduled rehearsal, so the armorer was not aware or present to do her job.

Several single safety constraints could have completely prevented this, like why was there live ammo on set?

It appears that multiple people dropped the ball and are collectively culpable.

It is hard to keep caring but the unfortunate filmographer is still dead.

JR

 

[Rybow]

If it’s true that it was an unscheduled rehearsal and the armorer wasn’t on set, then that weapon should not have been accessible. Guns are dangerous. Everyone knows this, and yet so many treat them as if they are mere toys.

During my time in film acting school we were taught to never point a gun directly at someone. That can be tricky for realism or if you are caught up in the moment.

 

[fazer]

Some revolvers can have the hammer partially pulled back but not cocked. If you release the hammer it can snap and hit the primer on the shell and fire without pulling the trigger.

 

[JohnRoberts]

Some revolvers can have the hammer partially pulled back but not cocked. If you release the hammer it can snap and hit the primer on the shell and fire without pulling the trigger.

That is pretty much what Baldwin said happened. Why was there a live round chambered under the hammer?

Modern single action revolvers have extra safety features. Old ones are so unsafe users are advised to not carry them with a live round even under an uncocked hammer. A 6 shot revolver is considered safely loaded with only 5 bullets. I have not heard much about inspecting that specific revolver used on the Rust movie set but I will speculate it was not a new modern revolver, for use on an old cowboy movie.

How it was loaded should not even be a question since live ammo should never be on a movie set, even as props. They prepare dummy loads for prop use that won't fire.

JR

PS: From watching old cowboy movies I recall seeing the "fanning" technique where the shooter holds down the trigger and fans the hammer back with his other hand to fire multiple shots quickly. Of course that isn't what happened here and they had to hold the trigger down to do that.

 

[pucho812]

Some revolvers can have the hammer partially pulled back but not cocked. If you release the hammer it can snap and hit the primer on the shell and fire without pulling the trigger.

Yes they partial pull back but there is a safety mechanism in place requiring the pulling of the trigger to let it go. In other words to leave that inbetween position I have to have pulled the trigger.

 

[JohnRoberts]

There is a news leak that the handgun involved in the Rust Movie set shooting, had its trigger mechanism modified. Apparently the prosecutors dropped charges against Baldwin based on this new information.

Note; this new information contradicts the FBI inspection of the same handgun that said it couldn't be fired without pulling the trigger. There still should never have been live rounds on that movie set and/or in that weapon.

JR

 

[pucho812]

There is a news leak that the handgun involved in the Rust Movie set shooting, had its trigger mechanism modified. Apparently the prosecutors dropped charges against Baldwin based on this new information.

Note; this new information contradicts the FBI inspection of the same handgun that said it couldn't be fired without pulling the trigger. There still should never have been live rounds on that movie set and/or in that weapon.

JR

2 different agencies get two different results on the same weapon? Seems fishy. So much for Alec having his day in court on a manslaughter charge. At least the civil trial is still going to happen.

And yes there was no reason for live rounds on the set. But as we have heard the set was dangerous and safety protocols were not followed.

 

[AnalogPackrat]

There is a news leak that the handgun involved in the Rust Movie set shooting, had its trigger mechanism modified. Apparently the prosecutors dropped charges against Baldwin based on this new information.

Note; this new information contradicts the FBI inspection of the same handgun that said it couldn't be fired without pulling the trigger. There still should never have been live rounds on that movie set and/or in that weapon.

JR

I smell BS. The gun in question is a Colt Single Action Army or replica thereof. It's a simple design (from 1873) and should not be hard to test or diagnose. There's not much to modify and any such change that would affect function would be apparent by testing or visual inspection/measurement of hammer, trigger, trigger spring, cylinder lock, and mainspring.



These guns can only be fired after the hammer is manually cocked (or accidentally struck from the rear over a live cartridge in the currently active firing chamber*) and the trigger pulled to release the hammer. A common fast firing (low accuracy) trick is to pull and hold the trigger then fan the hammer with the other hand.

People who are not familiar with firearms have a tendency to hold a gun with their finger on the trigger (often squeezing it). They don't even realize they're doing it. On an SAA that hasn't been cocked (by pulling the hammer fully back) this will not fire the gun. But if the trigger is pulled and held back the hammer can fire the gun even if it isn't pulled completely back and released.

*Because the SAA can accidentally fire if the hammer is struck (bumped by accident or the weapon is dropped), it was typically loaded with 5 rounds only and the hammer resting on an empty chamber for safety. When needed, the hammer was cocked which also rotates the cylinder to a live round.

 

[JohnRoberts]

The weapon has been well inspected by the court of public opinion.
==
Charges were not dropped against the armourer who is still liable either way. More information may come out in her court case.

JR

 

[pucho812]

The weapon has been well inspected by the court of public opinion.
==
Charges were not dropped against the armourer who is still liable either way. More information may come out in her court case.

JR

I’m no lawyer so forgive my ignorance, but say info does come out and it’s enough to go after Alec. Would the authorities be able to charge him again?
I ask because I think he would be able to be charged as he was not found guilty or innocent in a court of law. Or, would that be considered double jeopardy?

 

[JohnRoberts]

I’m no lawyer so forgive my ignorance, but say info does come out and it’s enough to go after Alec. Would the authorities be able to charge him again?
I ask because I think he would be able to be charged as he was not found guilty or innocent in a court of law. Or, would that be considered double jeopardy?

I am not a lawyer either but my layman's understanding of double jeopardy is that he can't be tried for the same crime twice once acquitted or convicted. If charges were dropped like in this case, that IMO is not the same thing as being tried and acquitted. In some cases federal law can be used to charge him with a different crime while I don't expect that to happen. (while I can't predict the future).

It was a freak accident, if anybody is liable the armorer appears to have been grossly negligent by not controlling the weapons and ammo better.

Baldwin is probably culpable for monetary damages but I think he already cut a deal and settled with the husband, that said there may be more family lawsuits in the works.

JR

 

[Gold]

You could tell it wasn't going to end well for the prosecution when the DA went on a media blitz. If there was a case she would have kept her mouth shut and gone to trial.

 

[JohnRoberts]

You could tell it wasn't going to end well for the prosecution when the DA went on a media blitz. If there was a case she would have kept her mouth shut and gone to trial.

the local prosecutors were working the case to gain political notoriety, I think at least one email was found from people trying to get on the bus...

JR

 

[pucho812]

You could tell it wasn't going to end well for the prosecution when the DA went on a media blitz. If there was a case she would have kept her mouth shut and gone to trial.

Got to get that 15 minutes of fame in somehow