General Zod

I guess your choosing to ignore the fact that he's a producer as well. It's very possible he was told there were dangers on the set and he didn't want to pony up the dough to ensure things were being done safely. If that happened - would he not bear some responsibility for this? As an actor only I agree and I've said from the start an actor being handed a prop shouldn't be responsible for something like this in my opinion.

rw2516

Why aren't the other producers being criminally charged?

GoldenJCJ

I think he bares some responsibility for neglecting certain duties as a producer but the “producer” role seems a lot more civil suit based than criminal. His ignoring safety concerns doesn’t seem like it would fall under Involuntary Manslaughter to me.

General Zod

I don't know. I know 5 of the 6 producers were there that day but apparently Baldwin was the only one in the immediate area where the incident happened. But I've no idea what factored into their decision to charge only him. Maybe he was the one who sent the firearms specialist home early or maybe he's the one who said no to some safety concerns. I'm sure it'll all come out in the trial. I mean if they had nothing at all they wouldn't charge him.

Josh-da-man

Correct. There were no criminal charges filed for Brandon Lees' death on set of The Crow.

Yes, there was a chain of events that led to Lee's death, but the armorer on that film should have verified that the barrel of the gun Massee was given was unobstructed knowing that he would discharge a blank round aimed at a human being.

Count Dooku

This CNN story makes sense of the questions about the charges against Baldwin as actor and producer

https://www.cnn.com/2023/01/19/us/sa...ged/index.html

Here is why New Mexico First Judicial District Attorney Mary Carmack-Altwies, who spoke with CNN on Thursday, said she decided to file charges:
So that is Baldwin's responsibility as the actor who was holding the gun. He should have checked it.



So his personal responsibility as the one who (is alleged to have) pulled the trigger.


To me, this reads as kind of a Venn diagram of responsibility. Baldwin as actor was responsible for checking the gun, AND in his role as producer, Baldwin was responsible for making sure that he, the actor, checked the gun. Basically saying that his double role should have given him a heightened sense of responsibility to be mindful of the gun's safety.
.
.
.
But, as has been pointed out, no other producers of the movie who were on set, have been charged with anything. So would not their producing responsibility include the same mandate for safety as Baldwin? Apparently not.

I think the actor and producer thing is to go on offense against the defense that actors are not responsible for checking to see if guns are loaded because there are other people whose job it is to do that. They don't want to let Baldwin claim that he was just an actor doing what actors regularly do. He was also a producer, so his responsibility was greater, even though they are essentially saying that it was his own responsibility to make sure he was more responsible.

GoldenJCJ

^ I can’t remember where I heard it but someone was talking today that Baldwin had been given the opportunity to learn how to check a gun to make sure it’s safe before handling and he chose not to accept that training. I’m not sure if that was specifically for “Rust” or if they were referring to past movies Baldwin worked on or what but that may have something to do with him being charged on the “producer” role.


I’m also fairly certain that those DA’s trying to make a name for themselves have pretty much guaranteed nobody will want to film a movie in NM ever again.

Decker

It's not the producer's job to make sure the gun is safe, and it's not really the actor's job either. The entire point of a gun wrangler's job is to make sure that the gun is "cold". That's where the criminal neglect is. Baldwin as producer shares some liability in the accident but not criminal culpability.

Also isn't the Director (who actually got shot here) at least as responsible as the producers (all combined) in overseeing what is going on during the shoot on the set? Why isn't he facing charges?

Josh-da-man

https://www.lcsun-news.com/story/new...on/7776372002/

andicus

So what would happen if, instead of a gun, it was a type of safety rigging? And say the person responsible for that rigging screwed up and an actor was killed. Would the onus have been on the actor to ensure the safety rigging was correct?

What if a scene involved electricity? Does the actor also have to check the wiring?

How about an underwater sequence? Etc.

Count Dooku

Pretty obvious neither of you will make it through jury selection.

Ash Ketchum

That would be true of all of us. Can you imagine the deliberations? "But General Zod said..." "And Count Dooku responded..." "And don't forget GoldenJCJ's point..."

ViewAskewbian

It's the General Zod / Count Dooku team-up I've always wanted but only if She-Hulk and Daredevil is are the prosecutors and Unfrozen Caveman Lawyer is the defence.

ViewAskewbian

Luke Nikas, (Baldwin's lawyer): "This decision distorts Halyna Hutchins' tragic death and represents a terrible miscarriage of justice. Mr. Baldwin had no reason to believe there was a live bullet in the gun -- or anywhere on the movie set. He relied on the professionals with whom he worked, who assured him the gun did not have live rounds. We will fight these charges, and we will win."

Rob V

I know this... IF someone was pointing a gun at me for a film shoot, I would be the one checking that goddam thing as well.

rw2516

The charges also presume any actor would have the knowledge and experience in firearms to determine if the gun is safe or not. What if Baldwin had checkedthe gun and as far as he could tell, with his knowledge, it was safe.

Noonan

Having good lawyers make intelligent statements is a refreshing change of pace. I agree 100% with this. Anyone with common sense can see this is a publicity/money grab only because of whom the actor was. A no-name and this would be nothing more than a tragic accident for the actor, not something they'd have to fight in court.

But they should absolutely try to find out how live rounds were on set and ended up in the gun. Someone should be responsible for that.

Decker

#1 : Presumption of Innocence

​​​​​​#2 : Do you feel like answering the question? Isn't a film director ultimately responsible for the actions on the set rather than the producer, who is the financial backer?

TomOpus

"Money grab?"

What money is someone getting over a bs charge?

dex14

I don't disagree with you and I think this whole thing is ridiculous.

Baldwin was a Producer, not an Executive Producer. A Producer's job is, in fact, to manage and oversee logistics on set.

rw2516

For civil liability I would think the buck stops with the production company. The company is liable, not the producers (investors). Stockholders aren't responsible for actions of company.
Another thing about actor checking the gun. If the actor is required to double check the work of the firearms expert, that would presume the actor has greater expertise than the firearms expert, able to catch the firearms expert's mistakes.

General Zod

I would watch that.

Osiris3657

I've got mixed feelings about this. One part of me is like "good! Fuck these Hollywood elitists who think they are above everyone else" and then another part of me is like "can you really blame Baldwin for this? The gun and ammunition went through a bunch of different hands before they got to him, hands belonging to people who are supposed to check for these kind of things"

andicus

This is pretty much the point I was making. How do you expect actors to have knowledge in any of these fields, and why would that knowledge be greater than that of the hired expert?

Decker

Found it.

SAG-AFTRA Calls Alec Baldwin’s ‘Rust’ Charges ‘Wrong and Uninformed’

The actors union SAG-AFTRA has issued a strongly worded statement rebuking the decision to charge Alec Baldwin for involuntary manslaughter in the death of “Rust” cinematographer Halyna Hutchins, calling the move “wrong and uninformed.”

“The death of Halyna Hutchins is a tragedy, and all the more so because of its preventable nature,” says the statement, which was released on Thursday. “It is not a failure of duty or a criminal act on the part of any performer.”

“If any one of these three people — Alec Baldwin, Hannah Gutierrez Reed or David Halls — had done their job, Halyna Hutchins would be alive today,” said Andrea Reeb, the special prosecutor appointed by Carmack-Altwies to oversee the case, in a statement. “It’s that simple. The evidence clearly shows a pattern of criminal disregard for safety on the ‘Rust’ film set. In New Mexico, there is no room for film sets that don’t take our state’s commitment to gun safety and public safety seriously.”

In its statement, SAG-AFTRA takes issue with the prosecutor’s line of reasoning.

“The prosecutor’s contention that an actor has a duty to ensure the functional and mechanical operation of a firearm on a production set is wrong and uninformed,” says the statement. “An actor’s job is not to be a firearms or weapons expert. Firearms are provided for their use under the guidance of multiple expert professionals directly responsible for the safe and accurate operation of that firearm. In addition, the employer is always responsible for providing a safe work environment at all times, including hiring and supervising the work of professionals trained in weapons.”

The union points to codified industry standards from the Labor Management Safety Commission that require “an experienced, qualified armorer to be put in charge of all handling, use, and safekeeping of firearms on set.”
“The guidelines do not make it the performer’s responsibility to check any firearm,” the statement continues. “Performers train to perform, and they are not required or expected to be experts on guns or experienced in their use. The industry assigns that responsibility to qualified professionals who oversee their use and handling in every aspect. Anyone issued a firearm on set must be given training and guidance in its safe handling and use, but all activity with firearms on a set must be under the careful supervision and control of the professional armorer and the employer.”