Alec Baldwin Indicted - Page 13

Puppy Lips · ‎05-09-2010

@Lakelife62 wrote:
@faeriemoon wrote:
It is my understanding that this was a rehearsal, and he pointed the gun because they were rehearsing the scene. The victim was in the line of fire (or beyond it, I assume), so the actual pointing of the gun was part of the rehearsal.

So in my convoluted way I guess I'm asking why so many here are shocked that he actually pointed the gun.
Because they don't like Alec, who is a cantankerous old liberal. It has nothing to do with what he did or didn't do. It is a personal vendetta.
Now that his role as producer cannot be introduced into evidence, jurors will have to look at him as a mere actor, taking direction from the Director.
From what I read, he was asked to test gun angles for a scene and that's when the weapon fired. I don't think it really matters whether the weapon misfired or he pulled the trigger.
For Involuntary manslaughter to stick, the defendent would have had to act in a reckless or careless way, or in the commission of a crime. I don't think the jury will have that kind of evidence.

@Lakelife62 Wouldn't pointing a gun directly at someone be considered reckless? I think it would.

Always remember that you are absolutely unique. Just like everyone else. Margaret Mead

Lakelife62 · ‎05-09-2023

@Puppy Lips wrote:
@Lakelife62 wrote:
@faeriemoon wrote:
It is my understanding that this was a rehearsal, and he pointed the gun because they were rehearsing the scene. The victim was in the line of fire (or beyond it, I assume), so the actual pointing of the gun was part of the rehearsal.

So in my convoluted way I guess I'm asking why so many here are shocked that he actually pointed the gun.
Because they don't like Alec, who is a cantankerous old liberal. It has nothing to do with what he did or didn't do. It is a personal vendetta.
Now that his role as producer cannot be introduced into evidence, jurors will have to look at him as a mere actor, taking direction from the Director.
From what I read, he was asked to test gun angles for a scene and that's when the weapon fired. I don't think it really matters whether the weapon misfired or he pulled the trigger.
For Involuntary manslaughter to stick, the defendent would have had to act in a reckless or careless way, or in the commission of a crime. I don't think the jury will have that kind of evidence.
@Lakelife62 Wouldn't pointing a gun directly at someone be considered reckless? I think it would.

Probably, if we were sitting around having drinks and appetizers. But in the context of the job Alec Baldwin was doing, it was required. Or at least that's the argument.

beckyb1012 · ‎03-09-2010

NM Stat § 3-2-3 (2023)

Manslaughter is the unlawful killing of a human being without malice.

A. Voluntary manslaughter consists of manslaughter committed upon a sudden quarrel or in the heat of passion.

Whoever commits voluntary manslaughter is guilty of a third degree felony resulting in the death of a human being.

B. Involuntary manslaughter consists of manslaughter committed in the commission of an unlawful act not amounting to felony, or in the commission of a lawful act which might produce death in an unlawful manner or without due caution and circumspection.

Whoever commits involuntary manslaughter is guilty of a fourth degree felony.

"Live frugally, but love extravagantly."

Puppy Lips · ‎05-09-2010

@Lakelife62 wrote:
@Puppy Lips wrote:
@Lakelife62 wrote:
@faeriemoon wrote:
It is my understanding that this was a rehearsal, and he pointed the gun because they were rehearsing the scene. The victim was in the line of fire (or beyond it, I assume), so the actual pointing of the gun was part of the rehearsal.

So in my convoluted way I guess I'm asking why so many here are shocked that he actually pointed the gun.
Because they don't like Alec, who is a cantankerous old liberal. It has nothing to do with what he did or didn't do. It is a personal vendetta.
Now that his role as producer cannot be introduced into evidence, jurors will have to look at him as a mere actor, taking direction from the Director.
From what I read, he was asked to test gun angles for a scene and that's when the weapon fired. I don't think it really matters whether the weapon misfired or he pulled the trigger.
For Involuntary manslaughter to stick, the defendent would have had to act in a reckless or careless way, or in the commission of a crime. I don't think the jury will have that kind of evidence.
@Lakelife62 Wouldn't pointing a gun directly at someone be considered reckless? I think it would.
Probably, if we were sitting around having drinks and appetizers. But in the context of the job Alec Baldwin was doing, it was required. Or at least that's the argument.

@Lakelife62 I suppose you are right. I think he will probably get off, and continue to be the ****** that he is. The life of the armourer will never be the same. I hope she can find some kind of work after she gets out of jail. She was careless and it cost someone their life. Hopefully changes can be made on movie sets so that there are no real guns used.

Always remember that you are absolutely unique. Just like everyone else. Margaret Mead

Etoile308 · ‎01-04-2014

I just flipped past channels and stopped on Court TV.

Wow, I don't think Baldwin's body language is doing him favors. Arms folded across his chest. One minute a scowl, next minute a smirk.

THEY CallMe Mr Wilkes · ‎06-29-2016

I thought the exact same thing yesterday.

Tinkrbl44 · ‎08-23-2010

@MyShadowLove wrote:

What I would like to know is why would Baldwin have the gun pointed at the Cinematographer when he pulled the trigger?

In reply to others who have stated that it wasn't the responsibility of Baldwin to check the gun beforehand, I have read otherwise in that there are stringent gun regulations on movie sets and that the guns are...(should be)... checked by all involved, including the Actors.

It is also questionable as to how a live bullet ended up in the gun to begin with if there are such stringent gun regulations?

@MyShadowLove @Kachina624 @Sooner

IMO, the live bullet is the real issue here. How did it even get there? Are people going to blame Alec for that?

Just fyi ------- I've lived in SoCal for decades and have known many people who work on TV and film sets. I've sat in many live audiences with TV shows filming.

One thing I haven't seen mentioned anywhere is the strength of the UNIONS in the entertainment industry.

Generally, you DO NOT do the work of another's job description or a union rep will be on the set, stopping production in a flash, and all helllo breaks loose.

The Teamsters do not fool around when it comes to job descriptions and duties.

Example, if a chair is in the way on a set, the prop person moves it, you don't. If a light bulb goes out you do not replace it, the electrician does that.

That is deeply ingrained in anyone who has worked on film sets, so Alec "not checking" could easily to avoid a union violation and no one (in the industry) would ever expect that of him.

Just my two cents, but this is a serious legal point.

occasionalrain · ‎03-10-2010

The CEO of a company hires an accountant who embezzles

should the CEO be charged?

A manager hires and later lays him off. The employee comes back and shoots his co-workers, should the manager be charged?

A producer hires an armorer who permits live ammunition on set that finds its way into a gun. An actor told the gun wasn't loaded, safe, by the person responsible for checking it, shoots the person who told the actor to point the gun at her. The actor is charged. Those who fault Baldwin for not checking the gun, fail to fault the cinematographer for also not checking the gun.

ROMARY · ‎04-28-2010

I keep thinking.......Has anyone bothered to research and try to find the person who placed the live bullets in with the faux bullets ?

Were there any disgruntled former employees, etc., etc. ?

'All in all', it's wise for defendants or suspects, etc. to NOT make any statements to anyone or answer questions from anyone,

without a lawyer present.

It is our right, as US citizens to remain silent, and/or have an attorney present.

Less is more.

'More or less', 'Right or wrong', 'In general', and 'Just thinking out loud ' (as usual).

lgfan · ‎10-19-2012

@Tinkrbl44 wrote:
@MyShadowLove wrote:

What I would like to know is why would Baldwin have the gun pointed at the Cinematographer when he pulled the trigger?

In reply to others who have stated that it wasn't the responsibility of Baldwin to check the gun beforehand, I have read otherwise in that there are stringent gun regulations on movie sets and that the guns are...(should be)... checked by all involved, including the Actors.

It is also questionable as to how a live bullet ended up in the gun to begin with if there are such stringent gun regulations?

@MyShadowLove @Kachina624  @Sooner

IMO, the live bullet is the real issue here. How did it even get there? Are people going to blame Alec for that?

Just fyi ------- I've lived in SoCal for decades and have known many people who work on TV and film sets. I've sat in many live audiences with TV shows filming.

One thing I haven't seen mentioned anywhere is the strength of the UNIONS in the entertainment industry.

Generally, you DO NOT do the work of another's job description or a union rep will be on the set, stopping production in a flash, and all helllo breaks loose.

The Teamsters do not fool around when it comes to job descriptions and duties.

Example, if a chair is in the way on a set, the prop person moves it, you don't. If a light bulb goes out you do not replace it, the electrician does that.

That is deeply ingrained in anyone who has worked on film sets, so Alec "not checking" could easily to avoid a union violation and no one (in the industry) would ever expect that of him.

Just my two cents, but this is a serious legal point.