News Alec Baldwin Accidentally Shoots & Kills Cinematographer, Wounds Director with Prop Gun

New allegations from the court documents. If true, some of these are pretty damning:

Mary Carmack-Altwies, the Santa Fe district attorney, reported that the Oscar-nominated actor and producer of the film was not present for firearms training prior to the start of filming - and when an hour-long training session was scheduled, he appeared uninterested and was on his cell phone.

Her team found 'reckless deviation from known standards and practice and protocol', noting that Hutchins was killed during an unscheduled rehearsal, during which the standard two safety checks were not carried out, and for which a plastic gun should have been used. ****

Among the papers filed on Tuesday is a ten-page probable cause affidavit - divided into two sections. One notes Baldwin's actions as the lead actor, and another explores his role as the film's primary producer.

Prosecutors note that Baldwin was absent from an initial firearms training session.

Gutierrez-Reed set up an hour-long subsequent session for Baldwin, but they only completed 30 minutes.

'According to Reed, Baldwin was distracted and talking on his cell phone to his family during the training,' the prosecutors stated.

The affidavit claims Baldwin gave 'inconsistent accounts' about how the shooting happened - first telling police he 'fired' the gun, then insisting he did not pull the trigger.

Prosecutors state that 'photos and videos clearly show Baldwin, multiple times, with his finger inside the trigger guard and on the trigger.'
​

Even if not criminally liable, essentially blowing off (no pun intended) the safety training is inexcusable.

Beyond that, inconsistent accounts, even if due to faulty memory or otherwise made in good faith, are a major red flag for law enforcement. Yet another reason why you don't talk to the police without an attorney present.

 

“No charges will be filed in the shooting of Souza” from what I read. That was the context of what I meant

 

You probably shouldn't go on TV and make statements about the case, either. But there is a certain level of a-hole that thinks they can ignore little things that apply to common people.

 

Baldwin is one of the best actors of his generation. But he's never been really good about keeping his mouth shut.

 

We're going to have to agree to disagree on Baldwin's abilities as an actor. From "Beetlejuice" to "Mission Impossible," he's always compelling and, in some things--Miami Blues, Malice, Glengarry Glen Ross, the Departed, even 30 Rock--he's near-brilliant.

 

I’d have to second this. He can come across like an ass at times and he’s been occasionally miscast but when he’s on fire onscreen, he’s brilliant.

 

His "I am God" speech in Malice is amazing.

He's also, in my opinion, the best Jack Ryan.

 

I'm not super familiar with him as an actor, but as far as the shooting goes - the sit was filled with problems, including a number of walk-offs from people who were concerned about safety.

As far as I'm concerned, if there's even a slight chance that you're holding a loaded gun, its your responsibility to make sure it's used safely.
While I'm not familiar on how movie sets are run, I saw a reddit post from a former producer who detailed all the steps and spheres of responsibility when using guns in a production - nearly all of which were violated. I have little sympathy for a famous actor/producer who's arrogance cost someone their life. I hope they throw the book at him.

 

If the allegations in that indictment are true, then I think prosecuting him for manslaughter is extremely reasonable. Obviously he didn't kill the cinematographer intentionally, but it sounds like he's alleged to have consistently engaged in gross negligence, and it also sounds like, as lead producer, he's responsible for allowing systemic negligence on-set by key crew members.

 

I didn’t see this coming https://www.theguardian.com/film/20...sume-filming-alec-baldwin-new-cinematographer

 

Interesting. I can't decide how cynical to feel about this. On the one side as tribute to the dead there's a certain logic to that, but it also feels like they realise this film is now likely to be a commercial success as large numbers will watch it for ghoulish reasons if nothing else.

There's no such thing as bad publicity as the saying goes.

 

I don’t go to movies, but you’d have to pay me a LOT of money or something to watch that. A person was killed and ppl are going to go see this anyway because of its notoriety?

 

There should be absolutely NO chance that you are holding a gun loaded with live ammunition on a film set. Live ammunition has no reason for being on set at all. Dummies are used for close ups of loading if required, and blanks (which are dangerous enough on their own) for filming.

If there was live ammunition in the armoury, we need to know why and what the armourer was doing with it.

 

The Twilight Zone, The Crow, Deadpool 2. Lots of movies continue production after accidental deaths. (Although, I will grant you the fact that The Crow was essentially finished.)

 

Brainstorm as well.

 

I see a value to having actors firing live ammo at a target range to show them what it feels like and how recoil feels so they can try to simulate it while filming - but, yeah, on a shooting range, not on the filming location between scenes!

 

I believe standard protocol is to behave is if every gun you handle is live unless it's been checked and cleared, even if there should be no way for there to be actual live ammo present.

 

Which is eminently sensible.

 

How did I not know about the deadpool 2 thing until right now.