Alec Baldwin will stand trial on manslaughter charges

[tyroneweaver]

it's called totality of the law
after all you did pull the trigger

JUST IN: Alec Baldwin to Stand Trial! Judge Denies Alec Baldwin's Motion to Throw Out Manslaughter Case | The Gateway Pundit | by Cristina Laila

A judge on Friday denied Alec Baldwin’s motion to throw out the manslaughter case.

www.thegatewaypundit.com

 

[Failzero]

Rut Row ( He will be Red Pilled )

 

[White 6]

it's called totality of the law
after all you did pull the trigger

JUST IN: Alec Baldwin to Stand Trial! Judge Denies Alec Baldwin's Motion to Throw Out Manslaughter Case | The Gateway Pundit | by Cristina Laila

A judge on Friday denied Alec Baldwin’s motion to throw out the manslaughter case.

www.thegatewaypundit.com

Sounds good to me. Let the jury decide, if he was responsible. I think he will get off, but it should be up to a jury of his peers, hearing the case complete, judging on the merits, beyond the shadow of a doubt.

 

[JoeB131]

it's called totality of the law
after all you did pull the trigger

JUST IN: Alec Baldwin to Stand Trial! Judge Denies Alec Baldwin's Motion to Throw Out Manslaughter Case | The Gateway Pundit | by Cristina Laila

A judge on Friday denied Alec Baldwin’s motion to throw out the manslaughter case.

www.thegatewaypundit.com

Actually, they can't even prove that. The gun was taken apart by the FBI, so you can't tell if it discharged accidently or not.

They've already convicted the armorer. I'm curious how you can convict two people of the same offense.

 

[Failzero]

Actually, they can't even prove that. The gun was taken apart by the FBI, so you can't tell if it discharged accidently or not.

They've already convicted the armorer. I'm curious how you can convict two people of the same offense.

The Gun was tested it worked like any other pistol of its design , Baldwin was the Triggerman .

 

[The Duke]

it's called totality of the law
after all you did pull the trigger

JUST IN: Alec Baldwin to Stand Trial! Judge Denies Alec Baldwin's Motion to Throw Out Manslaughter Case | The Gateway Pundit | by Cristina Laila

A judge on Friday denied Alec Baldwin’s motion to throw out the manslaughter case.

www.thegatewaypundit.com

Never point a gun at anything and pull the trigger unless you intend to destroy it.

He pointed a gun at a little itty bitty blonde woman and pulled the trigger. That's criminal negligence at least.

 

[HikerGuy83]

it's called totality of the law
after all you did pull the trigger

JUST IN: Alec Baldwin to Stand Trial! Judge Denies Alec Baldwin's Motion to Throw Out Manslaughter Case | The Gateway Pundit | by Cristina Laila

A judge on Friday denied Alec Baldwin’s motion to throw out the manslaughter case.

www.thegatewaypundit.com

Can't see how.

I completely detest the guy.

But this is the same thing they are doing to Trump.

 

[NewsVine_Mariyam]

Never point a gun at anything and pull the trigger unless you intend to destroy it.

He pointed a gun at a little itty bitty blonde woman and pulled the trigger. That's criminal negligence at least.

But it wasn't supposed to be a "real" gun right? Or do they use real guns and they are just not supposed to be loaded with "real" rounds?

I honestly do not understand how something that's not supposed to be "real" (not supposed to have the ABILITY to cause "real" harm) ends up being the grounds for a prosecutable charge.

The only thing I can think of that maybe would have changed the outcome is if Baldwin personally checked the weapon to ensure it was not improperly loaded EACH and EVERY TIME the weapon was out of his hands (like what we would do with a real firearm) but I would imagine that would annoy the director or whomever was in charge?

 

[braalian]

The Gun was tested it worked like any other pistol of its design , Baldwin was the Triggerman .

The whole point was that he was lead to believe it was a prop gun that wasn’t capable of firing live ammunition

Clearly he shouldn’t have been goofing around with it, my dad taught me never to point or play around even with an unloaded gun.

But the armorer is obviously the one who hears primary responsibility

 

[there4eyeM]

A totally absurd legal process and waste of time and money.
For some reason, the agenda of some people insists on distorting the entire situation. They refuse to recognize the context. A movie set is only tangentially related to "reality". It is a special set of being, as are plays and other stage performances. There are "actors" who are really playing at what is not "real". It is not like being in your living room or out on the street.
For obscure reasons, there is a fear and hatred of Baldwin that provokes an irrational reaction in certain quarters.
He will never be found guilty after any necessary appeals and will never be in jail for this incident, and shouldn't be.

 

[para bellum]

But it wasn't supposed to be a "real" gun right? Or do they use real guns and they are just not supposed to be loaded with "real" rounds?

I honestly do not understand how something that's not supposed to be "real" (not supposed to have the ABILITY to cause "real" harm) ends up being the grounds for a prosecutable charge.

The only thing I can think of that maybe would have changed the outcome is if Baldwin personally checked the weapon to ensure it was not improperly loaded EACH and EVERY TIME the weapon was out of his hands (like what we would do with a real firearm) but I would imagine that would annoy the director or whomever was in charge?

Of course it was a real gun and he knew it was a real gun. Crew members said they went out back and fired live ammo on the set during breaks.

There was also a prior accidental discharge before this incident happened. That alone should have caused a full stop and reset of the procedures and rules on the set. All live ammo should have been removed, period.

First rule of gun safety is every gun is loaded. It is an easy thing to check, especially when he knew there was live ammo on the set. Even when shooting, the practice in the industry is for the actor to aim at a target on the wall, never at another person.

Also that gun has a safety that can be engaged without interfering with the action. That should never have been disengaged, unless the filming called for an actual discharge of a blank round.

The armorer may have had primary responsibility, but it was Baldwin's production- he hired the armorer, and he had the responsibility to ensure that they were following industry safety practices.

 

[NewsVine_Mariyam]

Of course it was a real gun and he knew it was a real gun. Crew members said they went out back and fired live ammo on the set during breaks.

There was also a prior accidental discharge before this incident happened. That alone should have caused a full stop and reset of the procedures and rules on the set. All live ammo should have been removed, period.Wh

First rule of gun safety is every gun is loaded. It is an easy thing to check, especially when he knew there was live ammo on the set. Even when shooting, the practice in the industry is for the actor to aim at a target on the wall, never at another person.

Also that gun has a safety that can be engaged without interfering with the action. That should never have been disengaged, unless the filming called for an actual discharge of a blank round.

The armorer may have had primary responsibility, but it was Baldwin's production- he hired the armorer, and he had the responsibility to ensure that they were following industry safety practices.

Why would they use real guns?

 

[para bellum]

Why would they use real guns?

Authenticity. The gun was a replica of an 1873 Colt Single action army.

And they fire blank ammo when shooting, that takes a real gun.

Even blanks can be dangerous. Brandon Lee was killed by a blank while shooting the film "The Crow"

 

[Failzero]

Authenticity. The gun was a replica of an 1873 Colt Single action army.

And they fire blank ammo when shooting, that takes a real gun.

Even blanks can be dangerous. Brandon Lee was killed by a blank while shooting the film "The Crow"

It’s a ( Real ) Modern Version of a Historic Gun . It was not a Prop , and Baldwin treated it like a Prop , his cost cutting production values had real UNION folks ( Crew) scrambling from the set and bailing on the low budget Production due to Safety and other issues )

 

[JoeB131]

The Gun was tested it worked like any other pistol of its design , Baldwin was the Triggerman .

DA’s office denies Alec Baldwin’s attorney’s claim the gun used in shooting was ‘destroyed’

NEW MEXICO (KRQE) – Alec Baldwin’s attorney told a judge on Thursday that the state destroyed the gun used in the deadly “Rust” movie-set shooting. The announcment was made d…

www.krqe.com

Alec Baldwin’s attorney told a judge on Thursday that the state destroyed the gun used in the deadly “Rust” movie-set shooting. The announcment was made during a status hearing in the case against “Rust” actor-producer Alec Baldwin and the film’s armorer Hannah Gutierrez-Reed. However, the New Mexico First Judicial District Attorney released a statement after the hearing stating that the gun was not destroyed.

During the hearing, an attorney for Baldwin, Alex Spiro, said he received an email from the state that the defense would be receiving discovery today. Spiro also brought up the fact that the firearm at the center of this case has been destroyed by the state. “That’s obviously an issue, and we’re going to have to see that firearm – or what’s left of it,” Spiro said.


“The defense’s unexpected statement in the status hearing today that the gun had been destroyed by the state may be a reference to a statement in the FBI’s July 2022 firearms testing report that said damage was done to internal components of the gun during the FBI’s functionality testing. However, the gun still exists and can be used as evidence.”

 

[JoeB131]

Of course it was a real gun and he knew it was a real gun. Crew members said they went out back and fired live ammo on the set during breaks.

There was also a prior accidental discharge before this incident happened. That alone should have caused a full stop and reset of the procedures and rules on the set. All live ammo should have been removed, period.

First rule of gun safety is every gun is loaded. It is an easy thing to check, especially when he knew there was live ammo on the set. Even when shooting, the practice in the industry is for the actor to aim at a target on the wall, never at another person.

Also that gun has a safety that can be engaged without interfering with the action. That should never have been disengaged, unless the filming called for an actual discharge of a blank round.

The armorer may have had primary responsibility, but it was Baldwin's production- he hired the armorer, and he had the responsibility to ensure that they were following industry safety practices.

That sounds like a great case against the Armorer, but not against Baldwin.

 

[there4eyeM]

That sounds like a great case against the Armorer, but not against Baldwin.

There is no case against Baldwin in this matter.

 

[Mac-7]

If I were on the jury I’d have to vote not guilty

Baldwin is a Hollywood asshole and I would hold him civilly liable and take every penny he has

But he should not be sent to jail in my opinion

 

[Failzero]

B

There is no case against Baldwin in this matter.

Baldwin was involved in low production cost cutting measures including Safety and Choice of the Low cost armorer and he was the Trigger man

 

[JoeB131]

B

Baldwin was involved in low production cost cutting measures including Safety and Choice of the Low cost armorer and he was the Trigger man

And that's a good argument for CIVIL liability against all the producers, but not criminal liability against Baldwin personally.

As a "producer", it just meant this was a scheme to get him a bigger cut of the profits if the movie did well. I doubt he ever saw Hannah Gonzolez's resume.