Grand jury in New Mexico charged the actor for a shooting on Rust set that killed cinematographer Halyna Hutchins

Actor Alec Baldwin is facing a new involuntary manslaughter charge over the 2021 fatal shooting of a cinematographer on the set of the movie Rust.

A Santa Fe, New Mexico, grand jury indicted Baldwin on Friday, months after prosecutors had dismissed the same criminal charge against him.

During an October 2021 rehearsal on the set of Rust, a western drama, Baldwin was pointing a gun at cinematographer Halyna Hutchins when it went off, fatally striking her and wounding Joel Souza, the film’s director.

Baldwin, a co-producer and star of the film, has said he did not pull the trigger, but pulled back the hammer of the gun before it fired.

Last April, special prosecutors dismissed the involuntary manslaughter charge against Baldwin, saying the firearm might have been modified prior to the shooting and malfunctioned and that forensic analysis was warranted. But in August, prosecutors said they were considering re-filing the charges after a new analysis of the weapon was completed.

  • Dark Arc@social.packetloss.gg
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    1 year ago

    This from the start has seemed to me like a prosecutor trying to make a name for themselves by taking down a famous person.

    If you’re doing a scene where you throw acid on somebody is the person throwing the acid supposed to check to make sure it’s not actually acid before they throw it?

    Should they check to make sure the knife they’re about to stab someone with is actually a prop?

    If you get to the person who’s been told to “do this action convincingly” and you want them to double check all the safety work you’re doing it wrong. Their job isn’t making sure they’ve been given safe tools, it’s using safe tools to make someone that’s fake but convincing.

    Everyone in the armoring company should be charged with murder … but Alec Baldwin did not put live rounds into a gun. He went into work, did his job, and because other people screwed up someone got shot. Maybe the industry itself needs to change but that shouldn’t be Alec Baldwin’s problem. That’s not justice.

    • bluewing@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      Even as an actor, if you are handed a replica of a deadly weapon you have a responsibility to make sure it is functioning properly and safe. And every actor should know that those firearms they get handed are most often real and can fire real ammunition. In such an environment, (particularly if you are also a producer - aka management), YOU are the final safety step before the director yells Action!

      The “I didn’t know it was loaded” is never a legal excuse for anyone at any time.

      • chaogomu@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        Except that’s not how it works at all.

        Proper procedure is for the prop master and armorer to be responsible for making sure the weapon is safe. They will then hand it off to whoever, and will loudly announce “cold gun”.

        The gun can be handed to an assistant or the actor, if it is passed to an assistant first, when they hand it over to the actor they, too, must announce “cold gun”.

        This lets everyone on set know that the gun has been verified safe by the armorer.

        Baldwin was handed a gun, and the person handing it over loudly announced “cold gun”. He was then expected to treat it like it was not loaded, because he was loudly told.

        The reason why you hire an armorer in the first place is because you don’t want your actors to think they know how to handle weapons. You want positive control of every weapon on set.

        That broke down on the Rust set.

        The story of how that broke down on the Rust set is actually quite interesting. It was a combination of nepotism (the armorer was the daughter of a famous armorer, and got the job through her dad’s connections) and the complete failure on the part of a prop company.

        See, the live rounds were reloads, loaded into the exact same casings as the dummy rounds normally used. The reason the reloads were made was actually valid. A different armorer on a different film shoot made them to let the actors of that film get an idea of how the guns they were using would actually kick.

        At the end of that film, the live rounds got co-mingled with the returned dummy rounds, and then those co-mingled rounds were rented out to the Rust production.

        The armorer for Rust should have caught these rounds. They were not completely identical to the dummy rounds. But this was her second film, and she had never actually worked with live ammo.

        When questioned by police after the shooting, she didn’t even know the brand name on the dummy rounds.

        Anyway, she had prepped the gun for filming, and then the assistant director took it from her cart and handed it to Baldwin, announcing “cold gun”. The assistant director did not check the gun either, he just grabbed it and handed it off.

        As a note, there were not supposed to be any live rounds, or even any blanks on set. Just dummy rounds.

        The other failure here was actually sort of on the victims. Industry standards for filming scenes like that is to use a monitor, and not have anyone standing in the potential path of a bullet, even if there are no bullets. The cinematographer and director were both standing behind the camera. Mostly because setting up a monitor takes time, and they were under a bit of a crunch to get the scene filmed.

        • bluewing@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          In the US, “I didn’t know it was loaded” is not a legal excuse. Try it in court yourself and see how far it gets you.

          The VERY first rule about firearms is that 'All guns are treated as if loaded at all times". And you NEVER trust anyone when they tell you it’s unloaded. You check yourself to be sure. This includes a prop gun handed to you by a prop person who announces “cold gun!” It takes mere seconds to check it yourself. No excuses…

          Your last paragraph shows even more negligence on the part of Baldwin. He broke another cardinal rule of gun safety by pointing an assumed unloaded gun at something he wasn’t intending to destroy or kill. And coupled with supposed rush to film, added to the complete breakdown of basic common sense firearms safety rules.

          There was negligence all around that ended at Baldwin. And no one else gets away with that much negligence, (remember he was also a producer - The Boss), in a fatal “accident” and doesn’t get tried in court. Because Baldwin is famous and rich should not prevent his day in court.

          • chaogomu@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            You’re confusing the firing range for the movie set.

            There are different rules, and in fact, there have been court cases saying that responsibility for the weapon being safe or not is completely on the armorer.

            Baldwin was told “cold gun”. That’s how movie sets communicate a safe weapon. Full stop.

            The great example is if an actor is supposed to throw acid on someone for a scene, do you expect the actor to check that it’s actually water? Or do you expect the person who is paid to check it to make sure?

            Baldwin followed industry procedure of accepting a weapon that was declared cold. It was handed to him by the Assistant Director, the person normally tasked with ensuring safety on set.

            • bluewing@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              Again “I didn’t know it was loaded” is not an acceptable excuse in a court of law when someone dies. And as a producer, Baldwin was also a boss of the movie. He also shares a responsibility to make sure competent people are hired to do dangerous jobs. He also broke your industry protocol when he pointed that gun directly at other people when he pulled the trigger during a break in filming. He very much appears to culpable for a good amount of the negligence that got someone killed.

              He needs to be charged and go through the legal process like anyone else would be, (hence the involuntary homicide charge). He should get no pass because he’s a rich and famous actor. If the court says it wasn’t or was his fault, then fine. The evidence was heard and the court rendered a legal decision and it’s done.

              • chaogomu@kbin.social
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                1 year ago

                It was loaded with dummy rounds, and one real round.

                Can you tell the difference with a glance? No? And you expect actors to be able to tell?

                He wasn’t just fucking around with the gun, either, he was working with the director and cinematographer for a camera test.

                The three of them were walking through the motions that would be used for the actual scene, complete with costumes and props. They were trying to get the positioning and lighting right.

                I don’t know why this is so hard to understand for you.

                And again, he doesn’t need to go through any process, because the precedent here is clear. The armorer is the person with the full responsibility for making sure that the weapons on set are safe. She was the one who loaded the gun.

                If this happened in any other state, Baldwin would never have been charged. But it’s New Mexico, and Baldwin made fun of Trump. The prosecutor is trying to make a name for himself by going after someone Trump hates.

                • bluewing@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  Yes, I can. And anyone who is going to handling dangerous items needs to be trained in properly handling them safely at all times. Even a complete novice can easily tell the difference just by looking, particularly after being shown how - it ain’t rocket surgery. And it takes mere seconds to make that check. Being an “actor” is NOT a valid excuse. Job safety is a real thing. And it runs from the top down to the end users. And Baldwin failed the safety part on two counts - being a boss on the movie by making or allowing a bad hire for an important safety job and as the end user.

                  He STILL broke a rule about safety on the set. Don’t point guns directly at people - even movies sets have rules about that according to you.

                  And yes, the set armorer has primary responsibility for firearms safety on set. But that responsibility doesn’t end there - it continues down the line of EVERYONE who is involved with the scene.

                  Nor do I understand the fear of Baldwin being charged. If, as you say, there is precedent for his innocence, then his money and fame should guarantee a not guilty verdict.

                  As far as the “political witch hunt” goes - maybe it is, maybe it isn’t. That’s another topic IMO. Perhaps those other states that wouldn’t press charges against a famous actor just value the money that a movie production brings in more than the life of any person. The entertainment industry as a whole gets by with a lot of shady shit that simply would not fly in any other industry. And all because of the money it brings in. California is probably the worst transgressor of this. There is billions of dollars riding on looking the other way in Hollywood. And that’s NOT a political statement - that’s just a lot of cold hard cash talking.

    • dangblingus@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      The cinematographer wasn’t an actor. They weren’t rolling. Why would you aim a (ostensibly prop) gun at somebody during a time when the cameras weren’t rolling and they’re not an actor?

      • RedAggroBest@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Because they were doing a camera test. The gun was drawn and pointed in the direction of the camera, which had people behind it because there weren’t supposed to be live rounds in the gun.

        I thought this had been settled that it was the fault of the master amorer who was wholly unqualified to be doing the job.

        • BrianTheeBiscuiteer@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 year ago

          There is blame from the armorer for sure, but I thought I heard something about real guns being on set to shoot for practice. Don’t take my word on that. If that was the case I do think Alec should take part of the blame, because real weapons have no place on a set. If you want actors to have target practice you take them to a gun range.

            • chaogomu@kbin.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              The set was not meant to have any live ammo. It was a “cold” set.

              The live ammo actually came from the prop supply company, co-mingled with dummy rounds.

              The live rounds were re-loads into casings that would normally be dummy rounds, because a previous film used them to train the actors how to react to live fire from their guns.

              The live rounds were then turned over to the prop company at the end of that film, and at some point became co-mingled with dummy rounds and then sent out to the Rust film location.

              The armorer should have checked every dummy round. But didn’t even know how to do so. The re-loads were also slightly different looking than the standard dummy round. (red paint in the logo vs blue for the dummy)

              As a note, when questioned by police, the armorer didn’t even know the name brand of the dummy rounds.

  • Ð Greıt Þu̇mpkin@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    I’m like 90% sure now that the absolutely glacial pace this is moving at confirms that the only reason verdicts come down so quickly in most other cases is because most accused can’t afford the court and lawyer’s fees to keep fighting for as long as they realistically could.

    • bamboo@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      Except if your name is Trump. Somehow he’s able to drag out all his court cases and not pay his lawyers.

      • Ð Greıt Þu̇mpkin@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        That I chalk more up to how pants shittingly terrified judges are of setting a new precedent, let alone one as impactful as jailing a former president. None of them want to be the guy who goes down in history as having locked up a major political figure without the most air tight case imaginable.

  • deegeese@sopuli.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    He hired the cheapest firearms manager, tolerated crew playing with real bullets, and so when he’s handed a loaded gun, it’s a direct result of his own mistakes.

    • lennybird@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Lowest bidder aside, how is this clearly not the armorer’s fault front and center? It was her responsibility to handle the set props. What Baldwin paid them is irrelevant to what she claimed she could provide and was obligated to provide under contract.

      She is literally the one to (a) claim the firearm was safe, but (b) load it with live ammunition.

      ???

      • n3m37h@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        Rule 1 of gun safety, check the gun you’re handed for any ammunition.

        What else needs to be said?

        Everything else is its own issue to be dealt with.

        He was given a firearm, did not do HIS due dilligence by checking the gun. He killed a fucking human being. . End of story

        • ImFresh3x@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Can’t really expect that any more than you expect that Macaulay Culkin in Home Alone personally made sure the paint buckets he swung at Joe Pesci were actually empty. It’s just not how it works.

          It’s up to the props people, in this case the armorer.

          • n3m37h@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            Youre forgetting the 50 year age difference, I dont expect anyone under the age of 15 to be responsible for setting anything up on a set. It takes 10 seconds to check a gun for blanks vs bullets. Frankly anyone who handles a gun anywhere be it real or have which blanks should know the difference and should check.

            This particular model you could not see any bullets so how hard would it be to open the cover and rotate the cylinder 6 times?

            Blanks are just as dangerous as real bullets just at different ranges.

            Alec has been around guns for how long? And didnt learn basic gun safety?

            Íve had to follow safety rules in every job ive been on. Ive uses just about every tool including both air and propane nail guns and the first rule is dont point it at anything tou dont plan on nailing and that has safety to prevent it from firing if not against an object.

            So why are actors any different? They get paid a fuckload more then me and dont have to follow safety and often make others do dangerous shit stunts and dont get salaries or recognition the actors do.

      • deegeese@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        He is the producer.

        Hi hired her. He tolerated crew using real bullets on set for playing target practice during down time.

        The boss created unsafe conditions, and killed his employee through negligence.

        • lennybird@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          I find that to be a pretty big leap. When she took the role of armorer she assumed all responsibility on set to ensure the safety of the crew, which was the entire point in Baldwin hiring someone to that position in the first place. Her gross negligence if not outright fraud is a result of her own actions and nobody else.

          At most I’d give 20% responsibility to Baldwin for not examining her background more closely.

          • deegeese@sopuli.xyz
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            Why do you think the grand jury, which certainly has seen more evidence than you, felt differently?

          • Poggervania@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            I would still say Baldwin is at fault since he wasn’t doing what he could to ensure safety on the set with real guns and live ammunition. The armorer fucked up 100% for sure, but they shouldn’t be the first and last line for following safety policies and SOPs - anybody in a leadership or managerial role should also be enforcing it.

            • lennybird@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              I find it highly unlikely that a film producer is going around checking weapon props on the vast, vast majority of Hollywood sets. I would be shocked if that ever happens.

              • Poggervania@kbin.social
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                He doesn’t need to check them, but he can certainly go “hey, make sure we’re following safety protocols!” so others can actually do that work - or at least, Baldwin can cover himself by saying he was trying to follow safety protocol.

                You say it’s the armorer’s fault (which it is), but Baldwin still could’ve done more to ensure safety on his end without checking every weapon prop like you said. Ask yourself: if the people in charge don’t follow policy and procedure, do you think the people below them would?

  • Vytle@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    This was homicide IMO, on the part of whichever dipshit brought live rounds onto the set Baldwin should still get manslaughter for pointing a gun at someone

  • Dangdoggo@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    I’ve said it once and I’ll say it again, if you’re holding a weapon it is your responsibility to know if that weapon is live, I don’t care who hands it to you or under what context. Children learn this in rifle safety.

    Does the armorer share responsibility? Definitely. But you can’t just say “someone else got hired to do that so Baldwin is off the hook.” Even pointing a gun around, live ammo or not, with the hammer cocked is plainly asinine and unsafe behavior. All Baldwin needed to do was take 5 seconds to open the chamber and look at the bullets to prevent someone losing their life, if that’s not negligence then what exactly is?

    • loopedcandle@lemmynsfw.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Core military leadership lesson: you can delegate authority, but it is impossible to delegate responsibility.

  • dangblingus@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    The brigading on the comments on this story is quite telling. Why do conservatives love Alec Baldwin so much? He’s a Democrat.

    • Draedron@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      I am a lefty and I think it is a shame he gets indicted for this. The gun wasnt his responsibility and it was an accident.

      • ef9357@lemmy.sdf.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        I respectfully disagree. If you touch a gun, you are responsible. If you mishandle a gun, you are responsible. If the gun fires while in your hand, you are responsible. That’s firearms 101.

  • FluffyPotato@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    Is there a reason they had a gun loaded with actual bullets or even actual bullets on the set? Isn’t like everything in movies done with blanks?

    • maness300@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      It’s my understanding the person in charge of making sure weapons were loaded with blanks had issues with using real rounds in the past.