Alec Baldwin and Gutierrez-Reed will each face two counts of involuntary manslaughter
- Thread starter alarmguy
- Start date
- Status
Accident, no. Negligence, yes.
Accident: Using prudent care but bad things occur unintended. E.G. with slippery hands dropping a loaded gun and the safety fails, causing it to fire and strike someone.
Negligence: Taking a dangerous weapon and pointing at someone and pulling the trigger. This particular gun required multiple steps. 1) Loading it by individual cylinders with live ammo, 2) The ultimate shooter, failing to inspect the condition to ensure it was empty of live ammo, 3) Pointing it at the victim, 4) Manually cocking the hammer, 5) Manually pulling the trigger.
This was not an accident. It was gross negligence and some form of aggravated assault murder manslaughter type offense. Regardless if your name is Alex Baldwin or Tom Jones or Susy Smith.
Accident: Using prudent care but bad things occur unintended. E.G. with slippery hands dropping a loaded gun and the safety fails, causing it to fire and strike someone.
Negligence: Taking a dangerous weapon and pointing at someone and pulling the trigger. This particular gun required multiple steps. 1) Loading it by individual cylinders with live ammo, 2) The ultimate shooter, failing to inspect the condition to ensure it was empty of live ammo, 3) Pointing it at the victim, 4) Manually cocking the hammer, 5) Manually pulling the trigger.
This was not an accident. It was gross negligence and some form of aggravated assault murder manslaughter type offense. Regardless if your name is Alex Baldwin or Tom Jones or Susy Smith.
This would be like being charged with involuntary manslaughter when the service writer at Discount Tire hands you your keys after a set of tires are installed and a wheel comes off making you wreck and kill a cyclist because the tire jockey forgot to tighten the lug nuts.
The opposite of accidental is intentional. Do you believe this was intentional?
No. It isn’t.
It’s like a kid getting the keys to that car - going 100mph - killing someone and then blaming the person that owned the car.
Guns are different.
Ignorance of, or failure to follow, the four safety rules can result in tragedy.
Further, the producer was responsible for safety on the set.
That guy was also the idiot holding the firearm, pointing it at someone, and pulling the trigger.
I think yes and no. There were procedures and rules for using a gun that were not followed. This is more like whether or not the service writer should be charged if there was a policy that he check with the mechanic that the vehicle was in fact finished, he didn't, and it turns out the mechanic hadn't gotten to putting all the lug nut back on, and that resulted in the death of the customer. In this case, I think the service writer should be charged.
Last edited:
You're incorrect and everything else being posted right now does not matter. We are talking law here, not rules, no this person should have, could have, would have or anything to do with tires on a car *LOL* come on already, read the meaning below, cut and dry.
Maybe this will help you and everyone else =
"The first type of involuntary manslaughter occurs when a defendant recklessly or negligently commits an act that results in the death of another person. Recklessness usually means that the defendant was aware of the risk that they were creating, while negligence usually means that the defendant was not aware of the risk but reasonably should have been aware of it."
You and anyone unclear of the meaning can click below-
involuntary-manslaughter
____
Alec, as producer of the movie, hired the moron weapons master who then handed him a loaded gun she asserted was cleared. As producer, he's an officer of the organization and responsible for personnel and their actions.
If I go to a hospital and hire a surgeon, and he kills me or my kid, I share some responsibility... I hired the guy, despite him being in the guild and having certifications.
If I go to a hospital and hire a surgeon, and he kills me or my kid, I share some responsibility... I hired the guy, despite him being in the guild and having certifications.
Still trying to figure out how one person who committed one murder gets charged with two counts for the same act. I get the MS charges for the people who erroneously “verified” the gun, but still… how does the law get two counts for a single crime?
Again. No.
That’s not how guns are handled safely and that’s not analogous to what happened here.
I hand you a gun, you have a duty to check its condition.
You have a duty to avoid pointing it at others.
You have a duty to avoid pulling the trigger.
You pick up one of my guns - and fail in all those ways - and you’re the one responsible.
Baldwin assumed it was unloaded. He wasn’t given the gun, he picked it up.
And assumed it was unloaded.
A severe, negligent, stupid mistake.
Easy there big buy...all I did was ask a question.
I don't think intentional, and while it is the opposite, negligence is the gray area that applies here. Kind of like if you are speeding in your car, lose control and kill someone. Did you do it intentionally? No, but your lack of care while operating a vehicle resulted in someone else's death.
I think this also has to do with him being the director at the time, the person who is responsible for ensuring the safety of the entire set.
Both I, and the law, disagree.
Guns are not cars. Guns are weapons. Cars are tools that can be weapons.
Furthermore, Mr. Baldwin is a PROFESSIONAL who has done countless movies handling firearms, and the standards for safety are remarkably high. On top of that, the gun safety rules do not say it's okay to point a gun at someone if someone else checked to make sure it's unloaded. No, the universal gun safety rules state to never point a gun at someone and pull the trigger (exceptions for recognized lawful reasons, of course). Baldwin violated I think 3 out of 4 safety rules.
It's even more problematic IMO because there was absolutely no need. CGI, ballistic glass, no need to stand in the line of fire or point directly at the person behind the camera AND PULL THE TRIGGER whilst she's standing there, or point it elsewhere.
Let's fix your analogy.
A experienced professional driver takes a movie maintained car, believing the brakes work but not himself checking, then turns it into a weapon by driving it at dangerous speeds directly at a movie pedestrian in movie rehearsal, with no safety checks or contingency plans if the brakes fail. The brakes fail. Pedestrian hit and killed. Oops. That's negligence, mostly on the driver.
One more point, there's also the concept of sharing liability. Two people can have contributed to and caused this death, and both will and can be held accountable equally or proportionally, criminal and civil law.
Thousands of movies with shooting scenes where prop guns are aimed and fired at actors without issue.
Someone failed to do their job here, and that is where the fault lies IMO.
Someone failed to do their job here, and that is where the fault lies IMO.
Easy here too...I think we're saying the same thing. I just pointed out that the analogy I was replying to was not accurate and a more accurate analogy that fits the facts of this case would be a service writer assuming something was done, not following procedure by not verifying it was done, and that lack of following procedure being the cause of death of another person.
It's an imperfect comparison but I didn't write the original analogy so I had to use what I was given.
Not sure you if read this = https://www.justia.com/criminal/offenses/homicide/involuntary-manslaughter/
Involuntary manslaughter occurs when a defendant recklessly or negligently commits an act that results in the death of another person. Recklessness usually means that the defendant was aware of the risk that they were creating, while negligence usually means that the defendant was not aware of the risk but reasonably should have been aware of it.
Earlier news reports indicated that the revolvers used in the movie were being used with live ammunition between takes for target practice. If true then Baldwin would have been aware that live ammo was present on the set and could have been used in the revolver he pointed that day. If the prosecution can prove this that is a textbook legal definition of negligence, if not recklessness. Live ammo on the set where revolvers are used that are not dummies but are actual firearms is a HUGE violation of all safety protocols.
Esoteric criminal law stuff, but plainly probably charging in the alternative, or lesser included offenses with different elements of the crime, different theories of exactly what occurred, etc. In this case he might be charged based on his leadership role at the studio, and in the alternative as the actual shooter. It's done frequently, and sometimes one conviction cancels the other theory out. Sometimes, they are combined in the end into 1 crime.
ETA: I should explain alternative charging theories. Basically the prosecution is saying that there's probable cause to believe A did the crime, and there's evidence he either did it this way or that way. We're presenting both highly probable theories for the jury to decide. They can decide based on evidence he did it the one way or the other or did not do it. If they're not sure how he did it but believe he did it they might pick one or both, in which case they are often combined into 1.
Last edited:
Where did I ask about involuntary or reckless? I was asking someone who posted that this was not accidental if they really felt it wasn't accidental?
- Status