Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunter's Campfire Rust armorer guilty of involuntary manslaughter

I'd put it in her.

I just read in the Epoch Times that the maximum penalty is 3 years. I don't know which is correct.

Everyone, (as many as 5? IiRC) who touched that gun that day, is equally guilty.

Every gun must be treated as loaded, and each handler must check the gun when they come into possession of it.

Baldwin also pointed the gun at the cinematographer which I understand from reading about this case is not standard procedure. The director and cinematographer and cameraman stand behind a lexan bulletproof screen. Also they practice a slight of hand where it looks like the camera is looking down the barrel, but it is actually off set.

Apparently dumbass Baldwin did not practice these safeguards.

Did you see the "old Master" gun expert witness? Ha Ha he swept the muzzle at the people in the court 9 times in 3 minutes. The Bailiff stood next to him and pushed the muzzle down!. He even pointed it at the judge! And the armorer was grabbing cartridges from an apron like a nail pouch while Baldwin was yelling "reload, hurry, hurry let's move it"! They insisted on using live rounds for some shots to get the recoil, sound and smoke that is more realistic than blanks. The N.M. Osha inspector blamed it on set management not following their own rules and protocol. Hannah was screwed.

She is guilty, 18 months is about right. Baldwin is also guilty.

THE CIVIL CASE HAS BEEN SETTLED.

Reportedly for $15 million.

Put your hands on your hips, shake your head and say "I just don't care."

It'll be more believable if you say it with a lisp.

It was a single action revolver I believe. Baldwin not only squeezed the trigger but had to make the controlled effort to cock it first. He is as guilty as any.

Osky

Single action Pietta. A Colt replica made in Italy. Very well made pistol.

Where was this?

New Mexico

Courtroom video on Youtube, and clips from the actual filming. Looked to me like Baldwin was angry about crew walking off the day before over concerns with safety, and Baldwin was taking it out on the crew. He was skirting the rules, and doing a lot of the directing and running the set himself. Nobody had balls to stand up to him.

There are a couple professional armorers on the Fire, and they stated it's illegal to even have live rounds on the set. And many types of guns used in the film industry, won't accept live rounds.....they are built to only fit blanks. They do not use live rounds for "recoil, sound. or smoke", nobody likes Baldwin but let's stick to facts.

Not sure where you're getting your info ?

There is lots of blame to go around. The armourer was incompetent, negligent, disorganized, unprofessional, etc. The terrible gun safety culture on set was under her control and she did nothing. The production unit should have fired her. They didn't, so they are on the hook for the unsafe conditions. And in no way does findings of guilt on anyone else absolve Baldwin. It has been stated that the OSHA guidelines for actors with firearms is that each actor is responsible as well to ensure their firearm is safe. Baldwin didn't get his gun directly from the armourer as he should have, didn't check his gun, pointed it at her, cocked it, and pulled the trigger. There is no "But I'm an actor." exemption in law when someone is killed.

A lot of the prosecution's testimony was also applicable to Baldwin.

What if he didn't pull the trigger like he said? What if he let the hammer slip before it was fully cocked? The shock and trauma of that incident would naturally scramble everyone's best memory of what happened. If the cinematographer wanted a closeup of the barrel and cylinders, as some have suggested, Baldwin was breaking safety rules at her request. How such a shot could be taken "off camera" is a self contradictory impossibility

Actors are not required to be gun experts, if you think Tom Cruise or Brad Pitt check their guns during months of film shooting.....you are highly mistaken. They are not "guns", they are "props" intended to look like real guns....that is the armorer's job.

Actors memorize their lines, stand on the "X", and follow the instructions from the director....like it or not, that is their only job. Most have probably fired a real gun, including most of the famous gunslingers in film history.

The difference here is that Baldwin was not a mere actor. He was a producer and the top dog in the entire process to film this movie. Dont think the "only an actor" defense is going to work

"It has been stated that the OSHA guidelines for actors with firearms is that each actor is responsible as well to ensure their firearm is safe. Baldwin didn't get his gun directly from the armourer as he should have, didn't check his gun, pointed it at her, cocked it, and pulled the trigger. There is no "But I'm an actor." exemption in law when someone is killed. "

A few problems here: The professional armorers testified to the contrary. The armorer bears full responsibility for verifying gun and ammo safety. The Assistant Director is supposed to confirm it. Including the actor is "nice" but not required. Baldwin's only fault was pointing a gun, loaded with dummies, directly at the camera operator and director (although he was apparently directed to do so.) Halls only witnessed the "drum" being spun part way. He did not visually inspect each round being loaded or hear them rattle as is SOP. He admitted that he rushed the process. In fact, he stated he gave the gun back to Hannah who handed it off to Baldwin herself. She was extremely careless and incompetent and should never have been hired. That's on the management company. She brought lethal ammo onto the set herself and stated she - "usually" - shakes the dummies. Her attorney was very good, and no doubt expensive. Who put up that kind of money, and why, when she was obviously the guilty party with no excuses who could have plead out to a lighter sentence? Curious...

I think there are 6 producers and a couple Executive producers, I know you want to hang Baldwin but obviously there wasn't the evidence for a criminal charge.....civil will be the only recourse, and it's been stated that was 15 mil.

Producer in name only to give status to the project. No financial investment other than his fame. He might have had some back end compensation for that but he wasn't an active participant in the physical production of the movie itself. The money men Producers weren't either. They hire "production companies" to do all the busy work. The outfit out of Georgia got the OSHA fines, not the Producers, and not just here either, but on Nick Cage's film too where Hannah was fired over firearms safety concerns.

Um, yes there is evidence for a criminal charge, which is why he has been charged with the trial slated for April.