Dismissed

[Big bob]

Baldwin dismissed


https://www.nytimes.com/2024/07/12/arts/rust-trial-pause-alec-baldwin-shooting.html

[GTOguy]

Hopefully, this killer will get struck by lightning.

[KenHorse]

Man, those donations to the Commucrats surely ARE worth their weight in gold

[Datawiz]

He should have hanged.

[Swany00]

absolutely pathetic, you'd think it was almost done on purpose

[DAB]

our incompetent prosecutors.....sigh.....

[gs568]

Not surprised that he got away with murder.

[zeek]

Sorry, but I beg to differ. While Im certainly NO fan of Baldwin, I believe the verdict was correct. The only person responsible for this tragedy is the special effects/arms specialists. She got a well deserved 18 years.

[ricks327]

It was dismissed w/o prejudice, so there is still hope.

[Vandelay Industries]

It was dismissed w/o prejudice, so there is still hope.

I heard it was with prejudice.

[Big bob]

It was dismissed w/o prejudice, so there is still hope.

Wrong

[markids77]

Sorry, but I beg to differ. While Im certainly NO fan of Baldwin, I believe the verdict was correct. The only person responsible for this tragedy is the special effects/arms specialists. She got a well deserved 18 years.






I have to disagree here. Everyone who handles a firearm capable of accepting and discharging live ammunition is responsible for ensuring that weapon is "safe", and is never pointed at anyone or anything which is not the intended target.

If I am going to show you a firearm I will always check safe before I do so, and the muzzle will always be pointed away from either of us or any bystanders.

As a LEO I assume you will automatically do the same thing as soon as you get it... and nobody dies because every firearm is always assumed to be live at all times.

Mr. Baldwin did not follow those most basic safety protocols... he is liable for his negligent discharge.

[tjfontaine]

Baldwin dodged a bullet (ha) here - unlike the poor woman he shot. That said, I don't believe he intentionally tried to MURDER her but he was negligent in NOT checking the firearm himself in spite of the incompetent dumb bitch in charge of armory. The DA was clearly trying to make hay on his name and was incompetent by withholding evidence.

[zeek]

I have to disagree here. Everyone who handles a firearm capable of accepting and discharging live ammunition is responsible for ensuring that weapon is "safe", and is never pointed at anyone or anything which is not the intended target.

If I am going to show you a firearm I will always check safe before I do so, and the muzzle will always be pointed away from either of us or any bystanders.

As a LEO I assume you will automatically do the same thing as soon as you get it... and nobody dies because every firearm is always assumed to be live at all times.

Mr. Baldwin did not follow those most basic safety protocols... he is liable for his negligent discharge.


I agree with almost everything you said. The difference here is, this gun was supposed to be a prop. Imagine it as a cap gun. There is always some tom foolery on the job including making movies. He of course thought he was handling a prop and thought he was being funny pointing it at a person. I will admit, that was not the smartest thing to do, BUT....some one was going to get shot with that prop sooner or later due to the prop specialists ignorance. I maintain that he was not guilty of manslaughter.

[ricks327]

I heard it was with prejudice.

You are correct, thought I heard on the TV w/o prejudice. :cert:

[markids77]

I agree with almost everything you said. The difference here is, this gun was supposed to be a prop. Imagine it as a cap gun. I maintain that he was not guilty of manslaughter.

If I recall correctly some cast and/or crew members shot those "props" using live ammunition at some time during production, so there can be no imagining it was a cap gun.
Determination of guilt is beyond my scope here, but liability for the negligent discharge has been factually determined in my opinion.

[zeek]

If I recall correctly some cast and/or crew members shot those "props" using live ammunition at some time during production, so there can be no imagining it was a cap gun.
Determination of guilt is beyond my scope here, but liability for the negligent discharge has been factually determined in my opinion.

We will just have to agree to disagree...:cert:

[LATB]

Is it ok if I don’t give a damn about these people?

[04 commemorative]

Is anyone really surprised :confused5:

[CurtP]

absolutely pathetic, you'd think it was almost done on purpose
I have zero doubt that it was done on purpose.

[Vandelay Industries]

Is it ok if I don’t give a damn about these people?

I'd be worried about you if you did. :cert:

[jw38]

Sorry, but I beg to differ. While Im certainly NO fan of Baldwin, I believe the verdict was correct. The only person responsible for this tragedy is the special effects/arms specialists. She got a well deserved 18 years.

Nope. Whenever anyone hands you a firearm, regardless of whether or not you think that it's loaded or not, it is YOUR responsibility to ensure that it is safe. This is the number 1 rule of firearms safety. Baldwin failed to do this and he should have been held accountable for HIS ****-up. HE shot and killed the woman. The armorer didn't.

Baldwin got away with at least manslaughter. I think he got away with murder. The armorer got 18 months, not 18 years.

It was dismissed w/o prejudice, so there is still hope.

It was dismiseed with prejudice so he can't be tried again. An utter ****-up on the part of the prosecutor, who should lose her job.

[Frankie the Fink]

Sorry, but I beg to differ. While Im certainly NO fan of Baldwin, I believe the verdict was correct. The only person responsible for this tragedy is the special effects/arms specialists. She got a well deserved 18 years.

Dismissed with prejudice means it won't ever be retried, and, you are correct. Actors are not firearms expert and that's why there are armorers on set.

I've walked into gun stores multiple times and have seen a new potential gun owner trying the "feel" of a firearm and the counter person is responsible checking and clearing the firearm. In basic training, upon leaving the firing line, the drill instructors insert a metal rod into the barrel of each trainee's weapon ensuring they don't exit the line with a live round chambered...the fledgling troops don't have the experience yet to be trusted beyond that.

Actors don't actually arm and set off explosives in films either.

[jw38]

Dismissed with prejudice means it won't ever be retried, and, you are correct. Actors are not firearms expert and that's why there are armorers on set.

I've walked into gun stores multiple times and have seen a new potential gun owner trying the "feel" of a firearm and the counter person is responsible checking and clearing the firearm. In basic training, upon leaving the firing line, the drill instructors insert a metal rod into the barrel of each trainee's weapon ensuring they don't exit the line with a live round chambered...the fledgling troops don't have the experience yet to be trusted beyond that.

Actors don't actually arm and set off explosives in films either.

The person being handed the firearm is also responsible for checking to ensure it is clear. You were taught this in basic training from the very moment you entered the range. If you weren't, you were taught incorrectly.

There's a significant difference between firearms and explosives.

[GTOguy]

I have to disagree here. Everyone who handles a firearm capable of accepting and discharging live ammunition is responsible for ensuring that weapon is "safe", and is never pointed at anyone or anything which is not the intended target.

If I am going to show you a firearm I will always check safe before I do so, and the muzzle will always be pointed away from either of us or any bystanders.

As a LEO I assume you will automatically do the same thing as soon as you get it... and nobody dies because every firearm is always assumed to be live at all times.

Mr. Baldwin did not follow those most basic safety protocols... he is liable for his negligent discharge.
This is my take as well. Very surprised Zeek is giving Baldwin a pass on the Golden Rule of gun handling. Also, as a former LEO, I am relatively certain that Zeek knows that a singl action Colt type pistol needs to be cocked past all the notches to the 'fire' position, and that that gun can't 'go off' like an automatic. The only way to fire the gun is to bring it into battery by fully cocking it and pulling the trigger to release the hammer. You could drive nails with the thing fully cocked safely if you kept your finger out of the trigger guard. Baldwin 100% pointed the gun at the woman, made a snide remark, cocked it deliberately, and pulled the trigger, killing her. He is a murderer. Fact.

[6spdC6]

This is my take as well. Very surprised Zeek is giving Baldwin a pass on the Golden Rule of gun handling. Also, as a former LEO, I am relatively certain that Zeek knows that a singl action Colt type pistol needs to be cocked past all the notches to the 'fire' position, and that that gun can't 'go off' like an automatic. The only way to fire the gun is to bring it into battery by fully cocking it and pulling the trigger to release the hammer. You could drive nails with the thing fully cocked safely if you kept your finger out of the trigger guard. Baldwin 100% pointed the gun at the woman, made a snide remark, cocked it deliberately, and pulled the trigger, killing her. He is a murderer. Fact.

I got to disagree with you a bit on this one. I have been a gun enthusiasts all my life and even was a certified instructor for our states pre issue pistol permit safety classes. What Baldwin done was totally stupid but different rules are in effect for TV and movies. Got to be or it would be almost impossible to make a realistic show. Murder no, the highest manslaughter charges yes.

Just so no one gets the wrong idea, for the record I think Baldwin is lower than the crap that comes out of a backed up grease trap at a busy restaurant.

[Moond0ggie]

That is proper protocol when you are handling guns that exclusively shoot real bullets ,

The hollywood guns exclusively DO NOT shoot bullets & there are to NEVER be live rounds on set .

Actors DO NOT remove each fake bullet to check if it is a real bullet or one of three styles of fake bullets
in an accusatory fashion which calls out incompetence to the union armorer in charge with their set up .

Baldwins fault lies where he hired a young & not so serious armorer & it was his personal responsibility to provide
oversight to her , but they were both careless , as was the director who handed the gun to Baldwin , when the armorer was
not even on the set yet after lunch .

The most you have here is an accidental death caused by carelessness , nothing that would rise to a murder charge
that everyone throws around .

Also keep in mind that the scene they were practicing for , involved Baldwin drawing & firing (a blank round)towards the camera to
give a first person view of the shot , a perfect storm of mistakes took place & Baldwin has already compensated the family for the
accidental death . Throwing him in jail would not serve any benefit , as it was not a malicious act .

[Frankie the Fink]

The person being handed the firearm is also responsible for checking to ensure it is clear. You were taught this in basic training from the very moment you entered the range. If you weren't, you were taught incorrectly.

There's a significant difference between firearms and explosives.
Well I'd agree with you but then we'd both be wrong....

I was taught firearms handling LONG before basic and yet, the drill instructors were still the penultimate safety source - sort of like movie set armorers...

And you bold-faced my gun store example - so you expect some first time gun owner handling a revolver, semi-auto, shotgun, rifle, etc. merely getting a feel for the weapons to know how to check and clear them all - pretty silly.
I guess they learn the "manual of arms" by osmosis or something...

I guess some here know more than the judge...

[Frankie the Fink]

That is proper protocol when you are handling guns that exclusively shoot real bullets ,

The hollywood guns exclusively DO NOT shoot bullets & there are to NEVER be live rounds on set .

Actors DO NOT remove each fake bullet to check if it is a real bullet or one of three styles of fake bullets
in an accusatory fashion which calls out incompetence to the union armorer in charge with their set up .

Baldwins fault lies where he hired a young & not so serious armorer & it was his personal responsibility to provide
oversight to her , but they were both careless , as was the director who handed the gun to Baldwin , when the armorer was
not even on the set yet after lunch .

The most you have here is an accidental death caused by carelessness , nothing that would rise to a murder charge
that everyone throws around .

Also keep in mind that the scene they were practicing for , involved Baldwin drawing & firing (a blank round)towards the camera to give
a first person view of the shot , a perfect storm of mistakes took place & Baldwin has already compensated the family for the accidental death .
Throwing him in jail would not serve any benefit , as it was not a malicious act .

Nice summation.

[04 commemorative]

I have zero doubt that it was done on purpose.

I agree but he had to have lied about pulling the trigger....what that would do in the case,who knows. I would be 99.9% sure it was not done on purpose....

[GTOguy]

That is proper protocol when you are handling guns that exclusively shoot real bullets ,

The hollywood guns exclusively DO NOT shoot bullets & there are to NEVER be live rounds on set .

Actors DO NOT remove each fake bullet to check if it is a real bullet or one of three styles of fake bullets
in an accusatory fashion which calls out incompetence to the union armorer in charge with their set up .

Baldwins fault lies where he hired a young & not so serious armorer & it was his personal responsibility to provide
oversight to her , but they were both careless , as was the director who handed the gun to Baldwin , when the armorer was
not even on the set yet after lunch .

The most you have here is an accidental death caused by carelessness , nothing that would rise to a murder charge
that everyone throws around .

Also keep in mind that the scene they were practicing for , involved Baldwin drawing & firing (a blank round)towards the camera to
give a first person view of the shot , a perfect storm of mistakes took place & Baldwin has already compensated the family for the
accidental death . Throwing him in jail would not serve any benefit , as it was not a malicious act .
The problem with this is that in this case, the gun was a real gun. As is the case a lot of times in movies and TV. They don't use 'fake bullets'. They use blank cartridges. Which can still be lethal if fired at a person close enough. Brandon Lee and that Hexum guy are good examples of that.

[PLRX]

The problem with this is that in this case, the gun was a real gun. As is the case a lot of times in movies and TV. They don't use 'fake bullets'. They use blank cartridges. Which can still be lethal if fired at a person close enough. Brandon Lee and that Hexum guy are good examples of that.

I still wonder why he aimed at her. Another example of an idiot handling a weapon.

[GTOguy]

I still wonder why he aimed at her. Another example of an idiot handling a weapon.

Before it got pulled, there was talk of a discussion where the director was telling Baldwin what she wanted him to shoot at and he stated "Maybe I should just shoot YOU" and that's when he pointed, cocked, and fired. He did assume the gun was not loaded. But you never point a gun at anything you do not intend to shoot, loaded or not. Inexcusable. If I were the family, I would be outraged.

[roadpilot]

Who's to blame? The stupid prosecuter. ALL evidence must be
given to the defense. ALL. The judge had only one thing to do.
Dismiss the case. STUPID!!!

[04 commemorative]

Before it got pulled, there was talk of a discussion where the director was telling Baldwin what she wanted him to shoot at and he stated "Maybe I should just shoot YOU" and that's when he pointed, cocked, and fired. He did assume the gun was not loaded. But you never point a gun at anything you do not intend to shoot, loaded or not. Inexcusable. If I were the family, I would be outraged.

We all know what assume means

[Tikiman]

Baldwin 100% pointed the gun at the woman, made a snide remark, cocked it deliberately, and pulled the trigger, killing her. He is a murderer. Fact.


That is absolutely a true statement. Personally, I believe he thought he was firing a blank, but there is no excuse for his actions.

[KenHorse]

Who's to blame? The stupid prosecuter. ALL evidence must be given to the defense.

Or maybe it was deliberate........

[6spdC6]

Or maybe it was deliberate........

That thought crossed my mind. Hours ago I made comment like that on a gun forum I'm on. So far no one has replied, be it to agree with me or vilify me!

[Bill]

Who's to blame? The stupid prosecuter. ALL evidence must be
given to the defense. ALL. The judge had only one thing to do.
Dismiss the case. STUPID!!!

You don't think the case was thrown on purpose?

[Bill]

Or maybe it was deliberate........

You don't think the case was thrown on purpose?

I guess I should have read the whole thread first......

[PLRX]

What can I say? Civil law suit?

[roadpilot]

You don't think the case was thrown on purpose?

Probably

[roadpilot]

Or maybe it was deliberate........

She should be disbared. But not likely.

[jw38]

Well I'd agree with you but then we'd both be wrong....

I was taught firearms handling LONG before basic and yet, the drill instructors were still the penultimate safety source - sort of like movie set armorers...

And you bold-faced my gun store example - so you expect some first time gun owner handling a revolver, semi-auto, shotgun, rifle, etc. merely getting a feel for the weapons to know how to check and clear them all - pretty silly.
I guess they learn the "manual of arms" by osmosis or something...

I guess some here know more than the judge...

The person in the store, who is the ultimate authority over the firearm, must tell the customer how to ensure that the firearm is safe, BEFORE the firearm is handed to the customer. No matter the age, BEFORE anyone is handed a firearm they must be instructed on how to ensure it is safe...PERIOD.

Your drill instructors, as well as my Air Force basic training instructors, were the ultimate safety source, but I certainly doubt that they handed you a firearm before they instructed you on how to ensure it was safe.

That is proper protocol when you are handling guns that exclusively shoot real bullets ,

The hollywood guns exclusively DO NOT shoot bullets & there are to NEVER be live rounds on set .

Actors DO NOT remove each fake bullet to check if it is a real bullet or one of three styles of fake bullets in an accusatory fashion which calls out incompetence to the union armorer in charge with their set up .

As a 20 year military veteran, retired cop, and certified firearms instructor, I'm going to disagree with you. The proper protocol for handling any weapon that is capable of firing live rounds...as this firearm was...is for every person handling it to personally ensure that it is safe to handle. As has been shown in this case, some Hollywood firearms are actually capable of firing projectiles. This firearm had a trigger, firing pin, and chamber, and it was capable of firing blank rounds (which by the way are also dangerous) so Baldwin had the responsibility to check it. There was incompetence at every level and Baldwin should not be permitted to get off scott-free.