Oh m8.
News Alec Baldwin Accidentally Shoots & Kills Cinematographer, Wounds Director with Prop Gun
- Thread starter Locutus of Bored
- Start date
see, this is what I've been saying. There is a different btwn.
criminally negligent vs. negligent
Did someone bring up Megan "Jesus was a white man, too" Kelly?
hey, she has nice tits.
Let's add the Fifth Amendment to the list of things you don't seem to understand.
She's entitled to her 5th amendment, but the tactics of using 5th Amendment in this case is poor, it looks like she has something to hide , if you have nothing to hide, you come out and tell your side of the story
It's extremely rare for it to be a good idea to testify in your own defense, guilty or not. Given this was an act of clear negligence in an area under her direct responsibility, I don't think there's any way she could present what happened that day in a way that would get the jury on to her side.
but as mentioned in Megan Kelly's video, even if she's negligent, she is not criminally negligent
it's just like the Boeing planes trash, 2 of the max 767 crashed, and about 700 to 800 people are dead. Constitutional Law suggest that who applies to her also applies to employee of Boeing. So Boeing is clearly also negligent, clearly some bad design is caused all these 767 max problems. But by the same token, Boeing was never investigated for criminally negligent.
So the same thing should applies to her, if you want to take about negligence, there are quite a few suspect:
a) in the interview w/ Alec Baldwin, ABC quoted what George Clooney said: "Every single time I'm handed a gun on a set, every time, they hand me a gun, I look at it, I open it, I show it to the person I'm pointing it to, we show it to the crew....." Now Alec never did that, he said that's not his job, he rely on his crew to make sure of the above.
b) then there is Alec Baldwin's perspective, he said in part 1 or 2 of that same interview, he is rehearsing what the cinematographer told him to do. In other words, as strange as it sounds, she could be responsible of her own death. That she asked Alec to rehearse that scene w/ the gun with her.
it's just like the Boeing planes trash, 2 of the max 767 crashed, and about 700 to 800 people are dead. Constitutional Law suggest that who applies to her also applies to employee of Boeing. So Boeing is clearly also negligent, clearly some bad design is caused all these 767 max problems. But by the same token, Boeing was never investigated for criminally negligent.
So the same thing should applies to her, if you want to take about negligence, there are quite a few suspect:
a) in the interview w/ Alec Baldwin, ABC quoted what George Clooney said: "Every single time I'm handed a gun on a set, every time, they hand me a gun, I look at it, I open it, I show it to the person I'm pointing it to, we show it to the crew....." Now Alec never did that, he said that's not his job, he rely on his crew to make sure of the above.
b) then there is Alec Baldwin's perspective, he said in part 1 or 2 of that same interview, he is rehearsing what the cinematographer told him to do. In other words, as strange as it sounds, she could be responsible of her own death. That she asked Alec to rehearse that scene w/ the gun with her.
Last edited:
Still responsible, which was previously asserted that she was not due to age.
We don't need that sort of objectification here, thanks.
her case is no difference than the Stew Leonard's cookie case. They mislabel the cookie, that dance eats it, she drops dead. And yet there is no criminal investigation. Whether it's a gun or peanut causing death, same difference.
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/25500337/stew-leonards-cookie-death-orla-baxendale/
there are many death like this, you could call it negligence, but noone goes to jail because they are not doing their job
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/25500337/stew-leonards-cookie-death-orla-baxendale/
there are many death like this, you could call it negligence, but noone goes to jail because they are not doing their job
but she is protected under Constitutional Law. For e.g., if you don't return a library book online, you don't get a fine, then I don't get a fine.
This is embarrassing, unless you’re trolling us.
And her case was held in accordance with constitutional law, and found guilty.
Done. She is responsible, and was negligent. She had a job, she failed to do it, and someone died.
Things look especially bad considering she was hired on as specialist, to make sure things are done properly. The fact that she didn't even do that not only puts her character in jeopardy, but puts the entire production in a bad light.
She acknowledge prior to this job that she only did ONE job before this one, so her entire resume is 1 film. So she can't possibly be a specialist. It's a low budget production that gone wrong. She becomes the scapegoat. The people who are all partly responsible is Alec, David Hall, her, Halyna Hutchins herself and the production. So you can't assess some percent to some of the above people
I mean in the sense that being an armorer is a rather specialized job, with one very specific purpose. At this point, what matters is that she was hired for that particular job and failed to do it properly as she was inexperienced. It underlines the very idea that the people doing this should be experienced at doing so. Budget shouldn't even enter the equation; you do your job or you don't.
Last edited:
but if you were at that age, and you don't have the experience, a low budget film hire you, what would you do? I think the production should hire qualified people, so it's the production job to hire the proper experience person