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

Discussion in 'TV & Media' started by Locutus of Bored, Oct 22, 2021.

  1. CorporalCaptain

    CorporalCaptain Fleet Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2011
    Location:
    astral plane
    All that, and you still failed to answer the question. I was commenting on your reaction to what another poster said. I'd thought that had been obvious, but evidently one can't make those sorts of assumptions.

    By the way, "at no charge to their clients" would just mean that their clients don't foot the bill, not that they don't get paid.
     
    Shamrock Holmes likes this.
  2. gblews

    gblews Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2004
    Location:
    So. Cal.
    My point was, and still is, that to date, the police have not officially confirmed that a crime was committed, nor have they changed the status of the investigation to “criminal,,” which automatically means that Baldwin been named as a “suspect.” That is likely the reason he has nor conducted himself like he is a suspect. Now, if you have info that contradicts this, please present it.

    Further, the police may very well suspect or believe a crime did occur, but until they officially confirm that “belief,” by announcing that a criminal probe is now in progress, police informal beliefs are irrelevant, at least from the standpoint of the criminal justice system. . Your last sentence appears to indicate you agree.

    All you know, all I know, is that the investigation is ongoing.

    Uh, no. That’s not how the system works. It’s the job of the police to determine if a crime has been committed. The juries’ job is to then determine the guilt or innocence of the charged party or parties.

    Jurors may acquit based on their belief that no crime was committed , but that would not change the official police finding (jurisdictions may vary).
     
  3. the G-man

    the G-man Rear Admiral Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2010
    Location:
    to your immediate right

    I’m citing to NYS law here, because that’s what I’m familiar with but these are general principles:


    Police do not determine if a crime was committed. Rather, they form a basis as to whether, given the facts and circumstances known to them, there is a “reasonable belief” that a crime was committed (see, e.g., People v Stroman, 106 AD3d 1268 [2013]).


    Thereafter, the defendant is entitled to make various motions challenging the evidence, including whether there is sufficient evidence or allegations that a crime was even committed (see, e.g., People v Russo, 57 A.D.2d 578 [1977] [holding that acts alleged to have been committed by defendant did not constitute a violation of the statute and indictment must be dismissed before trial]).


    Assuming the case proceeds to trial (and putting aside the concept of “jury nullifcation”), the jury must find that all elements of the crime were proven beyond a reasonable doubt, i.e., that a crime occurred, and the defendant’s commission thereof (see, e.g., CPL § 70.20; People v. Roldos, 112 A.D.2d 388 [1985]). This means the jury has to decide (beyond a reasonable doubt) first that a crime was committed (e.g., the elements are there) and THEN that the defendant is the one who did it.


    (Note: I acknowledge under the above that a jury could find a defendant not guilty because, even though the jury finds a crime was a committed they do find sufficient evidence that the defendant was the party who committed it. However, the jury still have to find the crime was even committed to get to that point).


    Beyond that, as I said before, the evidence gathering phase often begins before the police have established reasonable cause to believe a crime was committed and, depending on the nature of the suspected offense, statements made by persons of interest or suspects are what provides that reasonable cause. With this in mind, even if Baldwin (or anyone else) had a good faith belief that he or she was innocent of any crime, it was highly advisable to have an attorney present.
     
  4. gblews

    gblews Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2004
    Location:
    So. Cal.
    This sounds like it was written by a defense lawyer, or politicians who used to be defense lawyers. I guess the statement that police determine if a crime has been committed is too simple for them,

    You got way too hung up on that first sentence, bruh. Anyway, this does not rebutt my statement at all. It simply says that the police determinr after their investigation, if they have a“reasonable belief” a crime was committed. If they determine that they don’t have a “retainable belief” crime was committed, they don’t look for suspects and make no arrests. If police conclude a crime was committed, they identify suspects, make attests, and if they believe they have the guilty parties, file charges.

    But make no mistake, , it is within the powers of police to determine if a crime was committed.

    Please point out the language in your post that directly rebuts what I just wrote.

    Did you put the word “then” in caps, or was that part of the text you copied?

    You completely misunderstood this passage. It simply is giving the procedure the jury is to follow in order to determine guilt or innocence of the defendant. If the jury acquits because they believe no crime was committed, that does not affect at all the police determination that a crime was committed. It would just be one basis for an acquittal. But officially, the recording of a crime would remain on record. It would then likely be classified as an unsolved crime,.

    Think about it, when the jury verdict is read, the only thing heard from them is “guilty” or “innocent.” The jury is not asked whether or not a crime was committed. That is probably because the reasons for the verdict are I largely irrelevant.


    Do you get the difference though, between the juries’ opinion on whether or not a crime wa committed and the official determination that a crime was committed? The juries beliefs are merely their opinions which may or may not affect their verdict. If the police (and prosecutor) do not believe a crime was committed, them there is nno need for a jury because, no trial.

    Let me reiterate, to my knowledge, there is still no criminal investigation going on. Therefore, there are no suspects or persons of interest. The police very well may suspect a crime occurred, but to date, they have not made it clear that they even suspect a crime was committed. That may change at some point, but we’re not there yet, unless you have information to the contrary. If so, post it.

    Also, as I said before, Baldwin is not “innocent,” ne has not been charged or identified as a suspect ot person of interest. And I’m sure he feels he I’d behaving accordingly.[/QUOTE]
     
  5. the G-man

    the G-man Rear Admiral Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2010
    Location:
    to your immediate right
    It really doesn't matter who wrote it. The law (as expressed in the ruling cited) says what it says.

    At this point, it's pretty clear you want to believe what you want to believe so I won't waste any more time in the law library. For your sake, however, I hope if you're ever questioned by the police, whether you think you're guilty or innocent, whether the police think a crime was committed or not, you lawyer up first.
     
    Locutus of Bored and Skipper like this.
  6. gblews

    gblews Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2004
    Location:
    So. Cal.
    Only, it doesn’t say what you think it says. :) Oh, and for the record I didn’t say that the professions of the authors of the cited you quoted mar reread. It was just an observation. You misunderstood that as well. :)

    “”in the library”? :lol: Stop, You found this stuff online and copied and pasted it in.. Nothing wrong with that, so why the subterfuge? Anyway, as I said, I think you misunderstood most of what you copied anyway, “law library” or not.

    I offered logical explanations of the stuff you posted here and a rebuttal to your nterpretation of the citations you posted. If you can explain to me why your interpretation of your cited are actually correct, please post it.
     
  7. Foxhot

    Foxhot Rear Admiral Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2011
    Location:
    foxhot
    What?!?
     
    the G-man likes this.
  8. the G-man

    the G-man Rear Admiral Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2010
    Location:
    to your immediate right
    Yep, you got me. Never set foot in a law library in my life and never do.

    [​IMG]

    Anyway, lunch hour's over and it's time to get back to work misunderstanding everything in those books and others like them. As I said before, it's clear you want to believe what you want to believe so good luck and god bless. :hugegrin:
     
  9. Timby

    Timby I Am That Fool Administrator

    Joined:
    May 28, 2001
    I believe the legal term for this is "flawless victory."

    Or maybe that's Mortal Kombat.

    Or both. Either way. Well-played savagery.
     
    Locutus of Bored and the G-man like this.
  10. gblews

    gblews Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2004
    Location:
    So. Cal.
    Yeah, I had a feeling my saying Baldwin is not “innocent” would snap your head back. :lol:

    I meant “innocent” from a legal standpoint. Since, to date, there has been no official determination that a crime was committed, there currently are no “suspects,” no “defendants,” at least to dare, and no one has been found guilty or innocent…yet.

    Oh yeah, you understand
    it all. :)

    BTW, if you really went to a law library, then I admit, I was wrong and surprised. But being in a law library by itself, would obviously not automatically increase one’s understanding of any material found found there, no?
     
    Last edited: May 21, 2022
  11. gblews

    gblews Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2004
    Location:
    So. Cal.
    And in times like these, one should take solace in any victory, no matter the size, I say. :)
     
  12. the G-man

    the G-man Rear Admiral Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2010
    Location:
    to your immediate right
    Alec Baldwin and Others Could Face Charges in ‘Rust’ Shooting, D.A. Says In a funding request, the Santa Fe County district attorney said that up to four people potentially face criminal charges in the shooting death of a cinematographer on a film set last year.

    Looks like a criminal investigation was going on all this time, and now the case is going to the DA to possibly charge…without anyone being charged by police, a determination a crime was committed, a suspect being named and/or a criminal probe being announced, after all.
     
    Last edited: Sep 27, 2022
  13. the G-man

    the G-man Rear Admiral Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2010
    Location:
    to your immediate right
    Alec Baldwin to be charged with involuntary manslaughter in ‘Rust’ movie set shooting

    Alec Baldwin will be criminally charged by New Mexico prosecutors for the 2021 fatal shooting of cinematographer Halyna Hutchins on the set of the film “Rust,” authorities said Thursday.

    Baldwin, the Emmy-winning star of “30 Rock” and dozens of films including “The Hunt for Red October,” shot the bullet that killed Hutchins. Baldwin said he “didn’t pull the trigger” in an ABC interview. An FBI forensic report obtained by ABC News uncovered that despite Baldwin’s denial, the gun could not have gone off without the pull of a trigger.
    Hmmmm....so much for the "if the police haven't determined a crime has been convicted, Baldwin isn't a suspect and should feel free to gab to the cops" theory.

    (Of course, the charges are merely accusations and Baldwin remains innocent until proven guilty in a court of law).
     
    Locutus of Bored likes this.
  14. valkyrie013

    valkyrie013 Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2009
    and "Rust" film armorer Hannah Gutierrez Reed was also charged.

    One of the counts is for involuntary manslaughter, in which prosecutors will have to prove there is underlying negligence, prosecutors said. This is a fourth-degree felony that carries a sentence of up to 18 months in jail and a $5,000 fine.

    The second charge is involuntary manslaughter in the commission of a lawful act, a more severe charge which requires proof that there was more than simple negligence involved in a death, prosecutors said. This charge includes a firearm enhancement, which adds a mandatory penalty of five years in jail.

    “Rust” assistant director David Halls signed a plea deal for the charge of negligent use of a deadly weapon, resulting in a suspended sentence and six months of probation.

    About time in my opinion. Probably both plea, and get what the assistant director got. Slap on the wrist.
     
  15. XCV330

    XCV330 Premium Member

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2017
    Location:
    XCV330
    If anything good comes from this, it will be last time there's a negligent shooting death on a set.
     
  16. auntiehill

    auntiehill The Blooness Premium Member

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2006
    Location:
    on the couch
    We can only hope.
     
  17. KennyB

    KennyB I have spoken............ Moderator

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2001
    Location:
    Tokyo Japan
    Sadly I most likely won't be----you can make all the rules in the world.....but people must FOLLOW them.
     
    fireproof78 and the G-man like this.
  18. Non Sync

    Non Sync Rear Admiral Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2002
    Location:
    Hiding from the NARA, I've said too much...
    As the armorer, Reed had a greater responsibility for the weapons on the set. She failed to keep them secure when not in use for filming, she should have been the one that loaded the weapon with blanks, and she should have made sure there were not any live rounds anywhere near the props (ideally nowhere near the set period).

    Should Baldwin checked the gun when it was given to him? Yes, but he would have been the third final check in the sequence. Six months' probation seems pretty light for Halls role.
     
    auntiehill likes this.
  19. XCV330

    XCV330 Premium Member

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2017
    Location:
    XCV330
    One thing about Baldwin checking the gun, this was not a modern swing-out cylinder revolver or even an old top-break. The saa only has a little gate to side of the hammer. You have to put it on half-cock, open the gate and turn the cylinder to be sure. Since you never load all 6, you then have to make sure you put the hammer back on the empty cylinder. I'm not saying he's not to blame but I agree she had more responsibility.
     
  20. Owain Taggart

    Owain Taggart Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2009
    Location:
    Northern Ontario, Canada

    Yeah, I'm surprised the armorer didn't end up with a steeper charge than she ended up getting, given what happened. It was her responsibility and she failed at it.
     
    KennyB likes this.