Alec Baldwin Accidentally Kills Cinematographer on Set of New Movie (1 Viewer)

[bigdaddysaints]

Possibly, but I think ultimately, the only one who will face criminal charges will be the armorer, unless someone deliberately loaded the weapon without the armorer's knowledge. I don't know how that could happen though.

And i believe that if the armorer is criminally charged, it would be along the lines of improper handling of a fire arm or something like that.
I feel like it'll eventually get chalked up to an accident and no one will get criminally charged.

 

[DaveXA]

I doubt there will be much with real precedence here, but I doubt it's ever happened that the person who hired them also pulled the trigger.

Yeah, it will be interesting to see how it all pans out in both criminal and civil courts.

 

[guidomerkinsrules]

Careful, people are going to accuse you of Baldwin bashing just because you are laying out facts.

give it a rest

 

[bigdaddysaints]

Careful, people are going to accuse you of Baldwin bashing just because you are laying out facts.

Facts? he's just laying out assumptions like the rest if us.. "I've been reading lots of articles" aren't facts..

 

[SaintInBucLand]

Facts? he's just laying out assumptions like the rest if us.. "I've been reading lots of articles" aren't facts..

So it's not a fact that Baldwin is an executive producer for El Dorado Pictures, the company that is producing Rust. And is it not a fact that executive producers are the ones in charge of hiring people for the production of the film, and the hiring of people who had a track record of mishandling guns on previous sets(and before this accident which caused people to walk off the set over firearm safety issues). Tell me which one of those is not a fact.

 

[DaveXA]

So it's not a fact that Baldwin is an executive producer for El Dorado Pictures, the company that is producing Rust. And is it not a fact that executive producers are the ones in charge of hiring people for the production of the film, and the hiring of people who had a track record of mishandling guns on previous sets(and before this accident which caused people to walk off the set over firearm safety issues). Tell me which one of those is not a fact.

Not all executive producers are in charge of hiring. So...

And, don't you think it's odd that if Baldwin was the guy doing the hiring, that he would support them walking out? Weird...no?

 

[superchuck500]

@superchuck500 , any precedence on what SWJJ and SIBL are saying, that he could be held criminally responsible for hiring the ones responsible for the neglected protocol? I would think that would be very hard to prove criminally. It would have to be him personally hiring, not the production co correct?

I don't think poor hiring is enough to support a homicide charge. There could there be some other lesser crime or perhaps regulatory violations but not homicide.

I was curious about this so I spent a few minutes in the New Mexico criminal statutes. I think the homicide charge that would be relevant here is involuntary manslaughter by lawful act. (See NM Stat. Sec. 30-2-3). That charge is effectively criminal negligence . . . which is what we appear to be dealing with here, presuming that nobody on that set did something intentional to put a live round in that gun to be used in the scene.

A critical element to criminal negligence in this context is the principle of proximate cause. Proximate cause is a cause or contributing factor that connects an injury to to action or omission. It doesn't necessarily have to be the most direct cause, but it also cannot be so attenuated along a causal chain that it can no longer be said that the outcome of injury was reasonably likely by the particular act or omission in question. From the standard New Mexico jury instructions, proximate cause is a cause that "in a natural and continuous sequence produces the injury, without which the injury would not have occurred."

I just don't think hiring is a proximate cause. But without knowing the full chain of events, I don't know whether there may be other acts or omissions in the production line for which Baldwin may have responsibility - that actually do amount to proximate cause. My sense of it now is still no, but I suppose there could be some specific act that gets to that point.

 

[Saint by the Bay]

The joys of the 24 hour news cycle and 6 billion media sources competing for clicks are really muddling this. People are writing articles trying to find something to make the story less cut-and-dry than it really is.

The production company will almost certainly have some civil liability and a lot of it. Baldwin has zero criminal exposure beyond what click-bait chasers are putting out there. It's unlikely he has personal civil exposure either, but it's possible he does. I'd think this would fall under the business though (the prod-co) and not the individual.

 

[SaintInBucLand]

Not all executive producers are in charge of hiring. So...

And, don't you think it's odd that if Baldwin was the guy doing the hiring, that he would support them walking out? Weird...no?

Like SWJJ said, this was a passion project for Baldwin. I am going with there is a very good chance he had a lot to do with the production cast of this film. He seems like the 'buck stops here' person at El Dorado Pictures. So that would make him pretty culpable, would it not?

 

[DaveXA]

Like SWJJ said, this was a passion project for Baldwin. I am going with there is a very good chance he had a lot to do with the production cast of this film. He seems like the 'buck stops here' person at El Dorado Pictures. So that would make him pretty culpable, would it not?

If that's indeed the case, then sure.

 

[UK SAINTS]

I doubt there will be much with real precedence here, but I doubt it's ever happened that the person who hired them also pulled the trigger.

It seems that I heard on one of the news "talk shows" that there was precedence of this happening on set (with regards to a producer being held criminally accountable). But, to be honest, I was probably reading about the Saints on this site, and was not giving it my full attention.

 

[Madmarsha]

A critical element to criminal negligence in this context is the principle of proximate cause. Proximate cause is a cause or contributing factor that connects an injury to to action or omission. It doesn't necessarily have to be the most direct cause, but it also cannot be so attenuated along a causal chain that it can no longer be said that the outcome of injury was reasonably likely by the particular act or omission in question. From the standard New Mexico jury instructions, proximate cause is a cause that "in a natural and continuous sequence produces the injury, without which the injury would not have occurred."

Good lord that's hard to wrap my mind around.

 

[superchuck500]

Good lord that's hard to wrap my mind around.

I think it is often simplified to reasonable likelihood of result. Was the act or omission at issue reasonably likely to produce the result.

Not sure if that helps.

 

[Sailorsaint]

Like SWJJ said, this was a passion project for Baldwin. I am going with there is a very good chance he had a lot to do with the production cast of this film. He seems like the 'buck stops here' person at El Dorado Pictures. So that would make him pretty culpable, would it not?

Well, maybe. A case could be made that he did not hire that particular AD KNOWING that he would screw up and get someone killed. A case could be made that he was giving an AD a second chance at a career and accidents happen. I'm not an industry insider so I don't know what the chain of events should have been. I see comments by other actors about what they have experienced in the past, but is that the standard? What should the standard be? Should every actor be a weapons expert or stunt coordinator? Should it be required that an actor take a gun familiarization/safety course before handling a weapon on the set? These are all things we can only speculate about and give our opinions on. In my mind/opinion, whoever is in charge of weapons and weapons safety may face a criminally negligent charge and everyone in the chain of command responsible for hiring will probably get hit with a civil suit.

 

[bigdaddysaints]

So it's not a fact that Baldwin is an executive producer for El Dorado Pictures, the company that is producing Rust. And is it not a fact that executive producers are the ones in charge of hiring people for the production of the film, and the hiring of people who had a track record of mishandling guns on previous sets(and before this accident which caused people to walk off the set over firearm safety issues). Tell me which one of those is not a fact.

But what is not fact is that Baldwin himself was invloved in the hiring and all the other stuff you mentioned. Is he the only person invloved in the production company? i ask because i don't know, maybe its basically a name only and he handles every aspect of the company? Is it Fact thartALL executive producers are in charge of hiring and all those things you mentioned? Some of the stuff you said was fact, but you included a lot of assumptions that you cannot prove, so the asnwer is no, your statements are not all factual.