Gunboards Forums banner
1 - 20 of 145 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
21,239 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
the hammer fell and FBI says their investigation of the revolver indicates it would not fire unless the trigger was pulled.

FBI took 10 months to figure this out. On top of their game no doubt.

Looks like scales of justice will have to do something with Baldwin but will he be charged ? Its negligent homicide, he aimed at gun and someone is dead.

Same as I was driving and did not mean to drive over Granny.

Blame game no doubt will continue as Baldwin tries to deflect all of this onto
some movie set employee.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
740 Posts
Legal semantics. We all know he had his finger on the trigger when he pulled the hammer back thus causing the gun to fire. So his contention is that he never "pulled the trigger." I believe after all the legal back and forth is over he will quietly plead guilty to a misdemeanor and in a civil settlement he will quietly pay her estate a lot of money. The big winners will be the lawyers. :devilish:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
19,239 Posts
They still don't know where the live ammunition came from....That being said, I doubt anybody including Baldwin will be charged...Bodes
well, you see... sometimes they do live fires (but usually not now with CGI) and well... um, the reports had it that crew was 'plinking cans' during the preceding lunch break
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,358 Posts
well, you see... sometimes they do live fires (but usually not now with CGI) and well... um, the reports had it that crew was 'plinking cans' during the preceding lunch break
I don't think anything to this affect has been mentioned since the beginning of the investigation....If this were truly the case somebody would have to be responsible, but strangely no one is currently being singled out for the live ammunition....The investigation doesn't appear to be heading in the direction that people were plinking...Bodes
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
493 Posts
He didn't do it...
EVERY GOOD LIBERAL KNOWS
guns kill people, quit blaming the idiot who pulled the trigger
(and for those about to eat their panties, yes, this is sarcasm - no where did the kanukian overlairds put my damn font)
Totally. Evil gun pulled his finger. Ban the guns. Poor Alec needs taxpayer subsidy for treating his mental trauma.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
43 Posts
What good defense lawyers do is DELAY, then COMPLICATE, and lastly if necessary litigate.

It might seem obvious to most that the gun would not just go off by itself, load itself by itself, or point itself at a person by itself. But a proper defense attorney will delay that conclusion while complicating the issue beyond all recognition. That is precisely what is happening.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,839 Posts
I haven't followed this matter. It's a terrible tragedy in any case. I also doubt seriously any ill intent if by now investigation apparently hasn't suggested. It seems no such allegations. As far as "accidents" go, I do wonder just how many pros reading this have gotten through entire 'packing' careers without "accidental discharge". Typically "range days". Let those guys cast the first stones. There's also possibly some "assumption of risk" theory attendant in respect of actors voluntarily placing themselves at muzzle end of a functional gun. Also, and showing my lack of specific knowledge, weren't there multiple levels of security screenings involved? Wouldn't/shouldn't others involved bear proportional responsibility too? I know of this actor and have viewed some of his films. I appreciate his talent. I don't know what level of responsibility should be assessed to him. "Pulling the trigger", like any training function often involves realistic scenarios. Much of formal training "pushes the edge". "Well trained folks make mistakes. Almost always, grace of God, no person injured.
I simply know that as sympathizing with all, I couldn't cast stones. My Agency trained quarterly. We still had the occasional "stray discharge report" as training. Never any injuries, but some red faces and some denials... "Wasn't me, wasn't me!" Syndrome.
Easy to judge, but equitably only as all facts reasonably to be ascertained.
Just my take!
Best!
John.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,431 Posts
I haven't followed this matter. It's a terrible tragedy in any case. I also doubt seriously any ill intent if by now investigation apparently hasn't suggested. It seems no such allegations. As far as "accidents" go, I do wonder just how many pros reading this have gotten through entire 'packing' careers without "accidental discharge". Typically "range days". Let those guys cast the first stones. There's also possibly some "assumption of risk" theory attendant in respect of actors voluntarily placing themselves at muzzle end of a functional gun. Also, and showing my lack of specific knowledge, weren't there multiple levels of security screenings involved? Wouldn't/shouldn't others involved bear proportional responsibility too? I know of this actor and have viewed some of his films. I appreciate his talent. I don't know what level of responsibility should be assessed to him. "Pulling the trigger", like any training function often involves realistic scenarios. Much of formal training "pushes the edge". "Well trained folks make mistakes. Almost always, grace of God, no person injured.
I simply know that as sympathizing with all, I couldn't cast stones. My Agency trained quarterly. We still had the occasional "stray discharge report" as training. Never any injuries, but some red faces and some denials... "Wasn't me, wasn't me!" Syndrome.
Easy to judge, but equitably only as all facts reasonably to be ascertained.
Just my take!
Best!
John.
John,

I do not disagree. It would be tempting fate to say that one has never had nor would have an accidental discharge. All that can be done is follow one’s training, use good sense, always be alert and aware and always be safe.

The issue here is that:
1. He lied.


A woman is dead and that should never be forgotten but I suspect his arrogance and dangerous behavior were root causes that could have been avoided.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,358 Posts
I haven't followed this matter. It's a terrible tragedy in any case. I also doubt seriously any ill intent if by now investigation apparently hasn't suggested. It seems no such allegations. As far as "accidents" go, I do wonder just how many pros reading this have gotten through entire 'packing' careers without "accidental discharge". Typically "range days". Let those guys cast the first stones. There's also possibly some "assumption of risk" theory attendant in respect of actors voluntarily placing themselves at muzzle end of a functional gun. Also, and showing my lack of specific knowledge, weren't there multiple levels of security screenings involved? Wouldn't/shouldn't others involved bear proportional responsibility too? I know of this actor and have viewed some of his films. I appreciate his talent. I don't know what level of responsibility should be assessed to him. "Pulling the trigger", like any training function often involves realistic scenarios. Much of formal training "pushes the edge". "Well trained folks make mistakes. Almost always, grace of God, no person injured.
I simply know that as sympathizing with all, I couldn't cast stones. My Agency trained quarterly. We still had the occasional "stray discharge report" as training. Never any injuries, but some red faces and some denials... "Wasn't me, wasn't me!" Syndrome.
Easy to judge, but equitably only as all facts reasonably to be ascertained.
Just my take!
Best!
John.
You're correct, unforeseen things invariably happen....However when live ammunition is introduced in a place where it's really not warranted, the consequences of these happen stances can be magnified....Bodes
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,839 Posts
John,

I do not disagree. It would be tempting fate to say that one has never had nor would have an accidental discharge. All that can be done is follow one’s training, use good sense, always be alert and aware and always be safe.

The issue here is that:
1. He lied.


A woman is dead and that should never be forgotten but I suspect his arrogance and dangerous behavior were root causes that could have been avoided.
The pivotal question concerning 'his lie(s): Were they contributory TO the accident. Highly relevant as 'causal' perhaps. OR in statements after the accident as perhaps trying to avert responsibility/liability. The "lie" may well be a crime and civilly actionable. But if as for instance "excuse" for acts/omissions past, with knowledge of falsity; separate charges. A lie afterward may also be introducible in evidence as "acts suggestive of "guilt" / "guilty knowledge" and coverup attempts.

Also, generalizations... Not this case at all particularly. But people may say or conduct themselves in manner more attributable to traumatic shock than to factual reality. Distorted or suggested perceptions! The ever true line of defence lawyers resulting in respect of prospective defendants: "Don't talk to police." The officer taking a statement likely won't have special skillsets to judge such effect on a person they are interviewing. Participants and "percipient witnesses". Very vulnerable to being "led" and such typically "officer unintentional" Above, just general observations of law. Needing to add, I was a lawyer/investigator responsible for "making cases". But mine sophisticated criminals & crimes not suggestive of trauma impacting.

These ramblings, no legal advice suggested nor to be taken!
Best!
John
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
209 Posts
Without getting into politics... I'm thinking the armorer is the one who will take the fall on this.

It's a movie set, the actor is SUPPOSED TO POINT THE PROP at somebody and "shoot" them. I know they do trick camera angles and whatnot, but we've seen onscreen a thousand times- a gun lined up at a person, and "fired".

I've read where people scream that he should have checked the gun to ensure it's not loaded; but my understanding is, the ARMORER does that. And if an actor then fiddles around with the gun in a way they weren't supposed to, say drop the mag or open the cylinder- the armorer snatches that gun back, rechecks it to ensure it's safe, and tells said actor not to do that again.
Baldwin is many things, a screaming lib among them, but he's not a novice actor. I'm confident he's been conditioned to obey the armorer by now.

Like others have said, the biggest issue is how in the world they had live ammo on the set. It's a disaster waiting to happen, and in this case it did.
 
1 - 20 of 145 Posts
Top