Rust armorer Hannah Gutierrez Reed has been found guilty of Involuntary manslaughter.
News Alec Baldwin Accidentally Shoots & Kills Cinematographer, Wounds Director with Prop Gun
- Thread starter Locutus of Bored
- Start date
The Million Dollar question for Baldwin is whether or not this increases his chances for a conviction. I could see it either way. On one hand, the fact a jury found someone in his "employ" guilty may indicate the evidence against him is strong. On the other hand, either a jury or even the prosecutor may decide HGR's conviction is sufficient.
using the above as case law, the 2 FBI agent decided not to charge anyone w/ Brandon Lee's death, because there are too many people in that set. The mix up of bullet can be a no. of people, so it's unfair to pt. the finger at 1 person.
This case should be the same. If you allow a 24 yr. old to handle firearm, you have to ask how many yr. of experience can she possibly have?
I see her as a scapegoat, the incident is very sad, but there is a difference btwn. civilly responsible vs. criminally responsible.
there is also her wage, as a starter, is she only getting $1K/mth?
https://www.careersinfilm.com/armorer/
if so, she's only responsible for how much she gets pay
Part of her job was to make sure guns were loaded correctly. She fucked up.
The hell does that even mean?
okay, let's cut to the chase, exactly who give live round at the set? how did live round get there in the first place? she can't safe guard that room 24 hr. a day
if she only get $1K per mth., then her responsibility is capped at $1K/mth., just like you don't expect a McDonald waiter to responsible for the level of anything higher than a person who gets pay $1K/mth.
If she signed a contract agreeing to her responsibilities for $1k/mth, that's on her.
not true. A judge can override that. You can't make a 24 yr. old girl that doesn't know much and say "hey, you sign this, you eat this". She is so young to know what level of responsibility she can handle. When we were at that age, we were still in university, we don't know jack shit
She shouldn't be given that job, the only reason she got that job is because it's a low budget movie so they hire her.
She shouldn't be given that job, the only reason she got that job is because it's a low budget movie so they hire her.
you can't?
we're infantilizing 24-year-olds now?
I don't even know where to begin explaining how mistaken this and on how many levels. But what the heck:
1. One can't contract to avoid criminal liability. Such contracts are void as against public policy.
2. Criminal cases are brought in the name of the state, not the victim. The state was not a party to the contract. Therefore, the state is not bound by the contract.
3. Tortious conduct (for example, assault, wrongful death) is a wholly separate cause of action from breach of contract. The damages for tortious conduct are based on the injury suffered by the victim, not the income or financial status of the tortfeasor.
4. To be continued...?
but my pt. is, you can't expect her to function as a professional, due to her young age, and her low wage being a jr. armorer. You can only blame as a professional if she get paid top wage and have a good amt. of experience.
She didn't do anything intentional, such as assault like you mentioned, and at the end of the day, who exactly is the person who get those live round in the set? I didn't watch the entire trial. Ultimately, who on earth would be crazy enough to order live round to any set of any movie?
the culture of Hollywood is also to blame. Dwayne Johnson has said on CNN (sometime after this incident) that "From now on, there will not be any live round in his production", meaning that there WAS real bullet used in the past. And we all know he is not the only one.
Let's use history as a guide. Back in anicent Chinese dynasty, they have the Opium War, in which almost everyone in China is using Opium, they didn't know it's a dangerous substance, everyone does it, so noone see anything wrong w/ it.
Using real bullet is the same thing in Hollywood, they don't see anything wrong w/ it, so some production uses real gun, real bullet, Hollywood only have 1 bad incident w/ Brandon Lee, so they see that as a "1 off". This bad practice should have stopped decades ago. Now we have this case w/ Baldwin, and I bet all these production has removed real bullet in their set
She didn't do anything intentional, such as assault like you mentioned, and at the end of the day, who exactly is the person who get those live round in the set? I didn't watch the entire trial. Ultimately, who on earth would be crazy enough to order live round to any set of any movie?
the culture of Hollywood is also to blame. Dwayne Johnson has said on CNN (sometime after this incident) that "From now on, there will not be any live round in his production", meaning that there WAS real bullet used in the past. And we all know he is not the only one.
Let's use history as a guide. Back in anicent Chinese dynasty, they have the Opium War, in which almost everyone in China is using Opium, they didn't know it's a dangerous substance, everyone does it, so noone see anything wrong w/ it.
Using real bullet is the same thing in Hollywood, they don't see anything wrong w/ it, so some production uses real gun, real bullet, Hollywood only have 1 bad incident w/ Brandon Lee, so they see that as a "1 off". This bad practice should have stopped decades ago. Now we have this case w/ Baldwin, and I bet all these production has removed real bullet in their set
Bullshit.
When I was 24, I was working on my bachelor's degree, held two part time jobs, signed my forms, completed my contracts, and did my taxes. She is of legal age and responsible for reading and signing her agreements, or her agent is. We can't excuse the behavior because of age. In what world is a 24 year old not legally liable?
That's what locks are for and limiting access. That's the whole point of the job.
but the bottom line: who's decision is in to bring live round in?
Doesn't matter.
Her responsibility is what the prop was loaded with, to verify that it was loaded with dummy rounds, and to control access.
These steps, by the testimony, were not followed.
but according to the director who gives the testimony, he said after he was injured, he said "how can this be, how can there be live round in the set"
this is the reason there should be a no. of people responsible for her death. Hall shouldn't have said "cold gun", w/o checking.
And Baldwin should never pt. a gun at anyone, prop gun or fake gun. Unless it's fake rubber gun that can't fire, then it's a different story
this is the reason there should be a no. of people responsible for her death. Hall shouldn't have said "cold gun", w/o checking.
And Baldwin should never pt. a gun at anyone, prop gun or fake gun. Unless it's fake rubber gun that can't fire, then it's a different story
If someone else brought live rounds onto the set and loaded them without her knowledge, that's not her fault. Her responsibility ended with her handing a safe weapon over and correctly advising the recipient of it's status.
That's apparently not what happened. If she had some live rounds and they got mixed up, that's on her.
Age ? She apparently grew up around firearms, knew the responsibilities and claimed she was capable of performing the duties. If the live rounds being in play was down to her, it's her sole responsibility.
That's apparently not what happened. If she had some live rounds and they got mixed up, that's on her.
Age ? She apparently grew up around firearms, knew the responsibilities and claimed she was capable of performing the duties. If the live rounds being in play was down to her, it's her sole responsibility.
As armorer her responsibility was to ensure and control ammo.
That procedures were not followed does not absolve her of responsibility.
but since there shouldn't be live round, whatever weapon she hand over, she would assume it's a gun w/ dummy round. So the person who brings in live round, or the co. who sell dummy round and mix up and sell Rust crew as live round, they should take most of the responsibility
And that's why she's guilty. It's her job to not assume things about firearms.