A grand jury is a group of citizens asked to determine if there's enough evidence for charges to be filed against someone.
Can't say exactly why the earlier charges were dismissed but the charges can be refiled because he was never found not guilty as there was never a trial. Until a trial actually takes place and a verdict entered, it's not double jeopardy to refile charges.
You can't, the government can repeatedly attempt to idict you. A hung jury is also open for a second trial or even a third one. There are instances of people escaping conviction multiple times only for the government to try again and again until the person is convicted. You are either declared not guilty or you are capable of being found guilty until the end of time.
They don't need a grand jury to charge anyone. It's mostly done to check the prosecution's case. So GJ ends up being kind of like a mock trial with no defense side presented. Like here is our case, sound good and worthy to you?
Then as other said, until a verdict comes in you can be charged at anytime for a murder.
This is why there is definitely a lot more damning evidence against Baldwin. If they didn’t have enough to charge him the grand jury would’ve bounced it out
The earlier charges were dismissed because the FBI fricked up
They carefully redid the ballistics by reconstructing parts of that gun and said there's no way Baldwin couldn't have pulled the trigger
It makes sense they'd take a long time to consider what to finally go with for real because they get one chance to find him guilty and the likelihood of a conviction is not high for murder or even voluntary manslaughter.
He's saying he didn't. The gun 'just went off in his hand oopsies'
The first investigation on the gun said this was possible so the case collapsed.
The reinvestigation says it is not.
He was using a modern repro of a Colt SAA. The original model of this gun could possibly go off by itself in some extreme circumstances. The modern repro eliminated them. Also the extreme circumstances would likely be him pointing the gun in the direction it fired and then bashing the dropped hammer with a fricking mallet.
Basically he's talking complete horseshit.
First case wasn't a slam dunk, so instead of risking a double jeopardy, they threw the first case out and now they're indicting him as the producer who hired the shitty untrained firearm 'specialist'
it's a more unbiased way of determining if there's enough evidence to charge someone
so instead of just a DA looking at the investigation/evidence, it's a group of normies
it would be like if you gave all the receipts to Cinemaphile and asked them to come to a consensus
AGAIN? It was just some fricking Hoholina! Russians kill hundreds of these c**ts DAILY! What the frick do they want? He paid enough (at Denny's) already!
He shot 2 people and killed one. What are they putting on the death certificate? Killed by Gun? The fbi even tested the gun and said someone pulled the trigger.
>twice
I can at least sort of understand if it happens once. Some frick puts live ammo in the gun, and you're dicking around and pull the trigger by accident. But twice? That shit is deliberate. He deliberately shot those people. There is no way you can convince me that after pulling the trigger once and shooting someone he said "wow, what are the odds? Well, lightning can't strike twice!" And pulls the trigger again.
This is what really solidifies his guilt to me. Especially considering the animosity he had towards the whole production team leading up to this, it seems like too much of a coincidence that he was given a magical gun that kills his enemies without him even pulling the trigger.
4 months ago
Anonymous
One shot. Two people.
Please look up the basics of the case before participating.
Someone post the court animation I think it was just 1 shot but I don’t remember for sure.
In cases like this they will put "accidental pointed trauma." Ask me how I know. When we shot Dallas at no point did we expect the talent to be liable for a firearm that we then ordered to point at another human being, often times close to their ears or face. Throwing the book at Baldwin requires everyone involved be arrested as an accessory, including the scriptwriter.
Clearly I was poking fun with the trauma comment. But it would be ruled accidental in cases like this. I am quite serious about the breaking of laws on set, it is like handing out speeding tickets at the Indy 500! Can you imagine?
4 months ago
Anonymous
Comparing a speeding ticket to recklessly pointing a real gun at someone and killing them? If I went hunting and accidentally shot and killed someone, frick yeah i’d be in jail
4 months ago
Anonymous
That homosexual was making the same disingenuous arguments in the last thread.
4 months ago
Anonymous
What is the job of the armorer on a film set, could you remind me? I think they have one job and one job only, but I can't quite remember what it is...
4 months ago
Anonymous
She wasn't present for a period of time because muh covid
4 months ago
Anonymous
Sounds awfully negligent. Almost criminally negligent, even. What was her job again?
4 months ago
Anonymous
Why are you being such a disingenuous dork?
The armorer already got charged cause she's just as liable as Baldwin is, there's no gotcha here.
4 months ago
Anonymous
Comparing going hunting to using a prop gun on a film set that someone else loaded with live ammunition without your knowledge, frick yeah the person who loaded that gun should be in jail.
4 months ago
Anonymous
Thank you friend
4 months ago
Anonymous
It wasn’t a prop gun you dumb frick. Been said dozen times on this thread alone. He was using a real fricking gun not a toy
4 months ago
Anonymous
If you had a camera crew following you and were being paid and instructed to point a firearm at somebody that was chcked safe, and this happened? No you should not go to jail. It is called a movie. Should Baldwin have also been charged with brandishing when he drew and pointed the firearm? Jee whiz!
4 months ago
Anonymous
Would you put a firearm that someone said was safe into your mouth and pull the trigger?
4 months ago
Anonymous
go on
4 months ago
Anonymous
Do you honestly assume the actor took someone else's word for it rather than see for himself that the gun was safe?
Further, is that even a real gun?
4 months ago
Anonymous
I think I see what he is showing here, with the firearm in the mouth. In my day on closeup shots a replica was almost never used. Details mattered back then. Also you cannot and should not have talent fussing with ammunition and possibly introducing a foreign objec into the barrell. Armorer is first and last line of defense, which is why we often were paid a liveable wage (unless you were Irish haha).
4 months ago
Anonymous
Nice LARP, but you fricked up the most simple detail.
4 months ago
Anonymous
I see that my typos may make some people uncomforatble when I have claimed to have led a privledged career as a Master armorer. Details matter indeed. I lost the tip of my left middle finger to an industry accident and try my best to check my "own" spelling but my eyes just aren't what they used to be.
4 months ago
Anonymous
>cant see >shot himself >master armorer
lmao
4 months ago
Anonymous
I started a long time ago. I learned firearms in the military during the war, and ended up in film after I had to leave Florida. Because I was good with English, I got a job prrof reading scripts and screenplays (not the same thing!). When Sal Nunzio took ill, I submitted my resume as I had firearms handing experience in Korea. Damnmeed if I didn't get it too. Putting it the way you do though makes it sound comical, certainly!
4 months ago
Anonymous
i actually believe you, i was mostly shitposting for fun. whats the weirdest/rarest gun youve fingerfricked?
4 months ago
Anonymous
>He fell for it
lmao
4 months ago
Anonymous
4 months ago
Anonymous
This is a good question. While I did not work this set, I once got to hold the so-called solid gold .45 in the Man with the Golden Gun. Obviously a custom job but pretty amusing to actually handle.
4 months ago
Anonymous
okay how about weirdest operation. im thinking like blow forward shit
4 months ago
Anonymous
This may disappoint you but most of my work ws pretty vanilla. When I started as an apprentice I got to know some of the fellows that worked on the old sci fi sets and used "ray guns" that had to be handled under the same rules.
If you are holding a firearm and you murder someone with it, you are guilty of manslaughter EVEN IF you thought it wasn't loaded. He shot that poor woman like a dog in the street.
It's not though. That's why they have to find an angle that makes it unlawful, like saying he didn't follow the safety procedures.
4 months ago
Anonymous
Yes it is. Shooting someone is unlawful. Put down the bong.
4 months ago
Anonymous
No it isn't liberal fricking moron. Context matters or do you think Kyle Rittenhouse shooting someone was unlawful?
I bet you suddenly have a lot to say about context you piece of shit.
4 months ago
Anonymous
Not that guy but Rittenhouse was found not guilty based on a jury of his peers.
Alec deserves the same treatment. Let a jury decide.
4 months ago
Anonymous
Nonetheless, many self defense shooting never see trial at all because the act of shooting someone is not explicitly unlawful in and of itself. Context always matters with the law.
4 months ago
Anonymous
Rittenhouse never should have gone to trial, the DA and ADAs in that case should be prosecuted or at the very least sued.
He still has civil lawsuits pending, wonder when we'll hear more about those
4 months ago
Anonymous
Rittenhouse never should have gone to trial, the DA and ADAs in that case should be prosecuted or at the very least sued.
4 months ago
Anonymous
I’m pretty sure the safety procedures include “don’t shoot people”.
4 months ago
Anonymous
He pulled the trigger while there was a bullet inside and it was pointed at someone. That's the "angle" lmao.
It’s not that one actors fault that he killed Brandon Lee. There was a fragment in the chamber that popped out when the blank was fired. In this case, Alec is a producer and has a say in who the armorer is or is at least responsible for it. He pulled the trigger and the rumor is he may have ignored the gun safety stuff. Then he used the term “hot gun” which meant it had real bullets and George Clooney publically spoke out and said that it was a bullshit fake phrase that was never used in any film he worked in nor had he ever heard of it
4 months ago
Anonymous
>rumor is he may have ignored the gun safety stuff
yeah... they are going to say he was aware of live ammo being on set, live fire of prop weapons when not filming and then shooting a scene at all with the armorer not being on set.
If he was just an actor on set then there would be nothing to charge him with as the shooting itself wasn't really his fault. Yet as a producer and over all boss of the film he is held to a higher standard. So it sounds like this new case is if he ignored all the issues and set in motion a gross safety problem that resulted in a woman being killed on set. If that's the new case, it doesn't even mater who pulled the trigger.
4 months ago
Anonymous
That’s basically what indirect manslaughter is. Another word for criminal negligence. Which by all accounts entire set cutting corners, ignoring protocols, hiring people not fit for the job, to save money. Didn’t the armory woman get fired from another movie for negligence?
4 months ago
Anonymous
damn, even Clooney went after him? he's pretty left too, I'd have thought he'd stick by Alec
It was between takes. Alec had no reason to empty the gun into both the cinematographer AND the director. The sick frick. Maybe he thought it would be funny, but I'm not laughing.
>It’s only legal to fire when the camera is rolling
The camera’s not the only thing rolling
4 months ago
Anonymous
I’d imagine that are set of procedures you have to do which he should’ve known about. Checking the clip. Checking to make sure nothing is in the chamber. I never assume a gun is empty even if prop person told me it was.
4 months ago
Anonymous
Those are all things the armorer does. Actor’s can not and should not be responsible for distinguishing live rounds from blanks and duds. He is culpable as producer for allowing that eprostitute to be armorer in the first place, allowing her to turn safety into a joke, and allowing her to not be present when firearms were handled. He is not responsible for being the actor that pulled the trigger. You can’t blame an actor for blowing someone up if you hand them a stick of dynamite and tell them it’s a candle.
4 months ago
Anonymous
>allowing her to not be present when firearms were handled
No, the problem here is that HE proceeded to handle firearms when she wasn't, against the safety policy he no doubt had to read, and likely approved.
4 months ago
Anonymous
the eprostitute was on strike though
4 months ago
Anonymous
He was never told it was empty. He wasn’t even doing scene with the gun. He just picked the gun up which he had used for target practice earlier in the day and supposedly jokingly pointed it at the woman and shot her
4 months ago
Anonymous
Nobody said anything about empty. It wouldn’t make sense for the gun to be empty, it would either be loaded with blanks or duds.
>allowing her to not be present when firearms were handled
No, the problem here is that HE proceeded to handle firearms when she wasn't, against the safety policy he no doubt had to read, and likely approved.
The gun was handed to him by the AD. Like I said, as producer he is ultimately responsible, but not as the actor being handed a prop.
4 months ago
Anonymous
It was never handed to him. What part of that do you not get. He wasn’t even doing a scene where was going to use the gun. The gun still has the bullets in it when he went target shooting. He assumed that was emptied. But he never told it was.
4 months ago
Anonymous
Actually I set up a script so that when someone replied to that post, it would activate a small motor and fire a gun at a camera lady I have tied up in my living room. By replying tot that post you have caused the death of a woman. I am contacting the authorities, and you will be charged and jailed.
4 months ago
Anonymous
not even fricking close. He held a real gun to a woman's head, wienered the hammer back and sprayed her brains onto the ground. >durrrrr but how could he have known it was loaded???
Not exactly an air tight defence to kill somebody and then say, "but the gun could have had no rounds in it so it's not my fault".
4 months ago
Anonymous
>It was never handed to him. What part of that do you not get
Now you're just blatantly lying lol
4 months ago
Anonymous
He picked the gun up and “jokingly” pointed it at lady and fired. He even said this and people on set stated this. He was never handed the gun. He wasn’t even filming a scene with the gun
4 months ago
Anonymous
It was handed to him by the assistant director and told it was ready and safe for use
4 months ago
Anonymous
That’s what he claimant. He also claimed he never pulled the trigger
4 months ago
Anonymous
I forget what he said before it. I know the cinematographer had made some snide remark to Alec and Alec turned it on her before firing. Would have been a funny bit had it not been a live round spraying her brains across the set.
4 months ago
Anonymous
It was never handed to him. What part of that do you not get. He wasn’t even doing a scene where was going to use the gun. The gun still has the bullets in it when he went target shooting. He assumed that was emptied. But he never told it was.
You’re spreading misinformation. Although there have been claims that on-set firearms were used for plinking, there’s no evidence that Baldwin took part or that his pistol was used.
4 months ago
Anonymous
Why else would there be live rounds in the gun! Movies don’t use live wounds they use blanks. Only explanation for live rounds is that it was used for target shooting earlier.
4 months ago
Anonymous
He also had people quit the production because of near miss incidents so there's no way he was unaware of the risk.
Let's review: >knows there have been hazards on set already >has had firearm training on many films >hired an incompetent as the armorer >took a gun when the armorer wasn't even present >they weren't even shooting a scene that needed the gun, they were establishing angles >draws, aims and pulls the trigger on a gun as a 'joke' >later lies that he didn't pull the trigger >the gun is tested and this is seen to be impossible >makes the Hutchins family buy their own breakfast at Dennys (contributes a 33% off coupon)
Send that fricker down, 20 years at least.
4 months ago
Anonymous
>makes the Hutchins family buy their own breakfast at Dennys (contributes a 33% off coupon)
Kek, is this true?
4 months ago
Anonymous
Yup
4 months ago
Anonymous
Those coupons aren't free you know.
Well actually they are free, but still, he could've kept it for himself.
4 months ago
Anonymous
Yeah, but the coupon was expired. It's the thought
4 months ago
Anonymous
>Actor’s can not and should not be responsible for distinguishing live rounds from blanks and duds.
Alright, then actors should be responsible for making sure a qualified armorer checks the gun on their behalf in their presence. Which he did not.
4 months ago
Anonymous
He was the producer of the movie. By all accounts, production was a shit show and massive negligence was going on to cut costs. Don’t act like this was some 200 million professional production. It cheap C movie at most. Idiot Baldwin took “prop” gun put shooting earlier than assumed the gun got emptied.
4 months ago
Anonymous
Well aparently heads are when Alec "the ripper" Baldwin is on set
>wasn't for a movie scene >said "how I about I shoot you", pulled the gun out, aimed directly at her, and shot her >made her family buy him dennys the day after
yeah, I'd say he killed her.
>The act has to be unlawful for it to be manslaughter
no it doesn't, manslaughter is intent to do something reckless that then caused a person's death, the reckless act doesn't have to be illegal. I remember a scenario my criminal law professor liked to use was at a rooftop new year's eve party someone sees a paint can and decides to throw it off the roof as a joke, but it hit someone on the street and killed them. Throwing a paint can isn't a crime, but it was definitely reckless.
The argument is he didn't know the gun was loaded, and that the context of the situation means he had a reason to be holding and dryfiring a gun whilst in the presence of other people.
4 months ago
Anonymous
>he didn't know the gun was loaded
And that is why you check the cylinder yourself before pointing it at someone and pulling the trigger, the same standard that anyone on Earth would be held to other than Alec Baldwin apparently
4 months ago
Anonymous
Sure but that's not a reasonable expectation of someone on a movie set. It's the job of the armourer to do that, and they bear the responsibility if the gun is loaded.
4 months ago
Anonymous
Yes it is. Firearm safety is the responsibility of anyone handling a firearm. This is why Alec Baldwin is about to get his butthole turned inside out in a state penitentiary
4 months ago
Anonymous
When it comes to filming movies and the like, the responsibility for guns fall on the armourer in most cases. They are the ones liable for the guns on set. It's their job to make sure they're not loaded.
It depends on the context in which he shot the person he killed. I've heard conflicting reports, one wherein he supposedly was waving the gun around between shoots and pointed it at some crewman and said "maybe I should just shoot you" and then blasted the sorry frick. If that's what happened, Baldwin is getting a voluntary manslaughter charge without question. But I have also heard that they were filming a scene where he needed to point the gun at the camera and pull the trigger, in which case he isn't at fault and will probably walk free. The core issue is intent. Did Baldwin intend to shoot someone, and was he misusing the gun on set.
4 months ago
Anonymous
>When it comes to filming movies and the like, the responsibility for guns fall on the armourer in most cases
Only in your mind it does. Or if you wish you can post the relevant New Mexico state law with this phantom exception you've dreamed uo
4 months ago
Anonymous
> Did Baldwin intend to shoot someone, and was he misusing the gun on set.
He would’ve been charged for murder is they thought he intended to shoot someone. He’s charged with indirect manslaughter. Again, criminal negligence. I guarantee there evidence he uses that same gun to go target shooting. Why has live ammo in it. No other reason why it had live ammo. That means he knew that gun had live bullets in it. Even if he was told he was clear he should’ve checked himself. Because that any non moron who used gun earlier to
shoot at targets would do. Fact is, the gun should’ve never left the set. Should’ve never had live bullets in it and should’ve been in a lock box. Baldwin running a shit show production
4 months ago
Anonymous
>Did Baldwin intend to shoot someone
Clearly not. >was he misusing the gun
Obviously, because the fat c**t shot two people, killing one of them.
4 months ago
Anonymous
It is a reasonable expectation, though, to not aim, wiener and discharge the weapon while it’s pointed at someone, especially if you haven’t personally verified that it is safe to do so, and even then only if absolutely necessary.
If you were guilty of murder you would not be guilty of fricking manslaughter you absolute buffoon. You'd be guilty of murder, which is a different crime entirely and comes with its own requirements and of which there are varying degrees.
You people think you're smarter than everyone else but half of you don't even know what fricking words mean when you use them. Shut the frick up.
get a load of this moron. when Chauvin was convicted for saint fentanyl floyd he got 3rd + 2nd degree murder AND 2nd degree manslaughter. explain that one Black person
Explain what dipshit. Look it up yourself. It's not my job to repeatedly educate you you dumb inbred homosexual idiot moron brainlet dipshit.
4 months ago
Anonymous
>"you cannot be found guilty of murder and manslaughter" >proved wrong >"b-b-bbut bbbut bbbut look it up yourself"
ill accept your concession you projecting Black person
4 months ago
Anonymous
>noo explain the context of every court case ever to me right now
No. Learn something yourself moron. You're a pathetic subhuman embarrassment.
4 months ago
Anonymous
yes or no - was Derek Chauvin convicted of both murder and manslaughter?
4 months ago
Anonymous
What does it matter you dumb apeman?
Try to follow along buddy, it's hard for an obvious rightoid i know, but try to follow along just once. Don't just resort to insults, you aren't very good at it.
The original post in the chain said, if you murder someone with a gun you're guilty of manslaughter but that's not true, you could feasibly be guilty of murder, manslaughter, possibly both? Context matters moron.
Last post little guy!
4 months ago
Anonymous
you wrote a lot of words to dodge a simple "yes" or "no". are you ok? its a very simple question.
Because Wisconsin and Minnesota (don't remember which state it was, it's applicable to both regardless) are a radleft shitholes. California of the Midwest.
Following this logic, stuntdrivers should be charged with speeding and wreckless driving. I am not a fan of accidental deaths like this one, it is sad. But the fact remains that the armorer did not do her job. Also I understand the cinematographer was positioned ON PURPOSE in front of the muzzle. This is a no-no and usually worked around by using mirrors or water.
Stop acting like you know the fact. We don’t. What we do know is there is enough for a grand jury to think he should be charged. We can speculate. My personal theory is they have evidence he took that same gun out target practicing. You not explanation why a set gun would have live ammo in it. Likely he did tell armorer this because that’s against protocol. Set guns are suppose to be in a safe during filming and never to leave the set
We don't know if he went target shooting / practicing with it. The reports about that said it was crew members. But that is the prevailing theory about how live ammunition ended up in the gun. The Armorer didn't do their job properly.
As to the discharge, Baldwin is claiming he was practicing his draw as part of the set up for a scene and the gun just went off by itself with no input from him.
If you have some knowledge of the weapon he was using this is highly, highly unlikely. Nevertheless the original investigation concluded it was a possibility (either because they though they were using original colts or through [outside pressure]. Now they have reinvestigated and changed their mind.
So the armorer is being charged because the ammo being in their is her fault.
And Baldwin is being charged because he was holding it and pointing it at humans when it fired and it is currently believed the only way it could fire is if he worked the action.
Neither intended to cause a death so it is manslaughter.
4 months ago
Anonymous
Form what I heard as producer, Baldwin was one of the people that had access to the safe to the guns. I think strong possibility his arrogant ass took guns and went target shooting with crew and likely didn’t tell armorer because set guns are not to be used in such a manner. Reports show just massive incompetence going on at that set
No it’s not fascism
The regime ruling over you and their propaganda apparatus frames everything they want you not do do as “fascist” and as you only know this pattern you now also call everything “fascist” you disagree with. The prosecution based on political views is an authoritarian trait and can be found in Bolshevism, fascism, theocratic orders, oligarchies, etc and as you live in an oligarchy also in your state.
If you not correctly name things you WILL go down, blindly lashing out, which is why nothing you or people like you do has done anything to stop the encroaching tyranny. Gl anon
I love reading the Reddit comments about this. Without prompting, Liberals on Reddit mention that Alec is only being "persecuted for insulting the orange dictator" or something along those lines. It reveals the truth behind their insistence that he's not guilty--they only believe so because he shilled for their side against Trump. Kind of scary all you have to do to get away with murder to a Liberal is be a fellow Liberal.
Had this been anyone else, you lot would be calling for the shooter's blood, saying they were responsible for checking the gun, treat all guns like they are loaded, etc.
The system in place is the only reason Republicans have even a remote shot at the White House in the first place. Only in America does the candidate with the least votes keep winning elections.
People defending him are idiot. You point a gun at anyone and start pulling the trigger doesn’t matter if you think it’s empty. That’s at the minimum criminal negligence
They don’t shoot a gun off camera. The same gun they went target shooting earlier with. Do I think he intentionally tried to kill her. Course not. Still manslaughter. Only reason why he hasn’t been charged until now is because he’s a celebrity. He won’t get jail time because he’s a celeb
The gun is not even a gun, a prop gun is not a firearm, and is not something that should be expected to kill someone.
If he knew it was a real gun and had been shooting live ammo out of it, then he should have safety checked it, and he should have been educated how to use guns. If the director told him to use a live gun in a movie and he didn’t know how to operate it, the director should also be liable.
I refuse to believe he didn’t know how to use a real gun. He’s done tons to movies with guns. Only today that movies stop
using real gun. Meme of Samual L Jackson holding a toy gun which was CGI’d into gun in post production is what they do now. But this was a budget as frick movie that cut tons of corners
>The gun is not even a gun, a prop gun is not a firearm
A ‘prop gun’ is a non-firing, deactivated or replica weapon (hence ‘prop’) that is used for set dressing or costuming extras. They are controlled by the ‘Property master’ not the armorer.
The weapon used in this case was a fully functional, unmodified single-action revolver. Such weapons fall under the responsibility of the armorer, because they are to be handled and treated as live firearms at all times.
Stop referring to the weapon as a ‘prop’. It was not a prop weapon, it was a real gun.
>he should have safety checked it
No! The entire hollywood guide to firearms directly says to not have actors check anything as they could easily frick it up. They don't know guns and even something as simple as a check and easily have a mis-fire and that shots a blank wad and blinds a person or whatever.
the can watch the armorer load the gun, they can ask for it to be checked and shown to them before shooting but that's it. You should be doing actors with no guns. Hand gun from the pro to actor, actor shoots scene, hands gun back to pro.
I'd be willing to defend him if the armorer herself handed him the gun and told him it was empty. In that scenario I think it'd be fair for him to trust an expert. However in this scenario he received that information secondhand, which creates opportunity for dangerous miscommunication. At that point it was on him to either check it himself, or to have a qualified expert check it in his presence.
He didn't fricknig do anything WRONG! They handed him a fricking prop! How does a live bullet even get into a prop weapon? Who has fricking live bullets on set? Where did they come from!
If they manage to get this to trial its going to get dismissed with prejudice by any judge. If the optics wouldn't be so terrible his legal team would file a civil suit against the state too
The worst part about this is that it ensures 0 movies will use blanks from now on and it'll just be more post effect muzzle flash garbage like John Wick
Some directors just understand that loud effects translate to an audience reaction and others dont/don't care. Mann has been directing for decades and he does thrillers, he just understands these things are important.
>NOOOO you used a gun you had all good reasons to think was loaded with blanks but some moronic technician put REAL bullets without you being omniscient and figuring it out so you killed someone without meaning to and now we have to prosecute you to your grave because our country is obsessed with endless trials and everything in our shitty decadent country is about MONEY and we don't give a shit about what's simply right NOOOOOOO
Yes and no. Like if your drive drunk and kill someone that’s straight up manslaughter. No, you didn’t intentionally want to kill someone. But you knew driving drunk would increase the likely hood that it would happen. With Baldwin, basically just criminal negligence
There is obviously a lot more to what actually happened that we don’t know. You don’t get a grand jury indictment especially in a high profile case like without more than sufficient evidence to warrant a trail. Tells me there is a lot evidence that Baldwin fricked up
alec is a chud who has shown nothing but disrespect and contempt for firearms thousands of times over the years. he's never taken them seriously, and now he murdered someone due to his negligence. he's even threatened people with physical violence after being charged. pretty clear and cut case. lock him up.
Fact is, gun had live ammo in it. Why would a set gun have live ammo. Only explanation is it was used for target practice earlier. Using a movie gun for target practice alone is negligence. From what I read, set guns to be locked job a box with zero ammo in it during non filming. There no reason for that gun to ever had live ammo
Friend this is fundementally wrong. I was master armorer on the set of Dallas for 3 seasons and I can tell you that it was not uncommon to have red shot on set. There is also no such thing as a movie gun. A firearm is a firearm and it was not uncommon to load red shot when training the talent to simulate recoil.
It is not a "set gun" but a gun used on a set. Same as my hat is not a soup bowl. See? But anyway, we often would instruct talent in the proper handinling of firearms in the sense of reacting to recoil by using red shot before we went with the blanks on set.
Oh shut up. Baldwin didn’t need to learn how to use a gun. He’s been using guns his entire career. Mark my words, it’s going to shown he took that gun off set for target practice and why it had live ammo
It really has nothing with lerning how to use the gun, but more about realistic recoil effects that are best simulated after feeling the real "deal." Or else you can have an embarassing situation like Mr. Washburn had with Sorpranos.
I don't get it. Shouldn't the prop people be charged with handing an actor a loaded gun? The actor relies on them to do their job, he didn't know it was loaded. The guy who shot Brandon Lee didn't get charged with anything, the situation is no different
>prop people
Prop guns are deactivated or replica weapons used for set dressing and by extras, and are the responsibility of the property master.
Blank firing and operational weapons are to be treated as live and loaded at all times and are the responsibility of the armorer.
The claim that the weapon was a prop gun is completely incorrect and misleading. It was a real, unmodified, functional weapon and the failure of the armorer, AD and actor to treat it as such is what led to the shooting. All three parties bear responsibility for the shooting through criminal negligence and Baldwin is right to be held to account for his failure to abide by basic gun safety rules and SAG-AFTRA safe handling guidelines.
So no, the prop people bear no responsibility but the armorer sure does.
We have no idea what evidence the prosecution has. What we do know is it was ending for a gram jury to file charges. So that tells me it’s way more than circumstantial. Prosecution not going to go forward in a high profile case like this unless feel they have enough without a doubt to charge him
Is that supposed to somehow answer the question of >Why are r*ghtoids so absolutely gleeful about the prospect of Baldwin going to jail for this? It's not really because he made fun of Trump, right?
Or did you respond to the wrong post?
A grand jury is not going to serve indictment if there is no evidence for what the person is being charged with. That’s a fact. It’ll be up to a jury now to decide.
What are the odds that Alec Baldwin was just involved in a freak accident, and that he is not actually guilty of intentionally murdering someone? Does that seem to be the case, here? What happens after someone is charged with involuntary manslaughter?
> What are the odds that Alec Baldwin was just involved in a freak accident,
Not likely. If that was the case he would’nt have gotten an indictment. People on here obviously don’t grasp significance of that. Prosecutor has to convince a jury that enough evidence to charge him. Jury can’t agree on shit most the time. I expected them throw it out on lack of evidence. The fact they didn’t tells me there is a lot evidence
He would’ve been charged with murder if they had evidence he intended to kill her. I’ll stand by my theory that they have proof he took gun target shooting. Ignored protocols. He’s such an arrogant butthole this is not a stretch
Would a lovemaking scene be handled as a rape? Jesus wept, you people. Use your heads. If i jerked off before laying on top of Jamie Lee Curtis for a sex scene and her moist vag reconstituted my dried sperm such that they achieved conception, am I now a rapist? Or even the father?
You suck at analogies. Not single one compare to blowing a lady’s head off
4 months ago
Anonymous
God damn, were you dropped on your head? Read between the lines. A crime happened in my scenario. A LOADED GUN. Get it? My wiener? It was a metaphor for a loaded pistol. And somebody got hurt (JLC). You were saying something about sucking at analogies?
If the simple fact that he got indicted means there's likely more than enough evidence to convict, what does that mean for Trump and his 91 felony indictments across four separate criminal investigations?
What a stretch coming form same people head inquest on Trump being a Russian agent which proved bullshhit. FBI and DOJ who lied about Hunter Bidens laptop. Same people trying to remove Trump from state ballots. Nothing going on.
4 months ago
Anonymous
>desperate attempt to change the subject
To the surprise of absolutely no one.
4 months ago
Anonymous
No, totally difference circumstances. One involving a political party trying to rig election other butthole celeb that killer someone.
4 months ago
Anonymous
>Four separate grand juries. Four separate series of indictments. 91 felonies. But sure, it's all just "fake news" lmao
What's the deal with you morons thinking the more charges brought against someone the more valid those charges are? I bet if they said there were 2 billion charges against him, you would feel that much more certain that he was going away. Alex Jones owes 999 sextillion dollars to Sandy Hook for saying something weird was going on there? That's just 999 sextillion reasons he's a bad guy lmao. Try to grow a brain you fricking moron.
Charged by same people accused him working for Russians. Pee tape. Said Hunter Biden lap top was Russian disinformation. That compare January 6 to 9-11. Trump entirely different matter. pure election interference. Baldwin, nothing to gain by prosecutors. Guarantee they’re liberal as frick. I’m betting most people on grand jury were liberal and probably love Baldwin.
No matter how rediculous it sounds to have a loaded fricking gun on a movie set. He still killed someone. That lady is dead. Her son will grow up without a fricking mother. And even worse, kids will make fun of this kid because it was Alec Baldwin who did it.
i am not a cheeseburger
what is a grand jury? why was first chase dismissed? why can they open a new one? how is this one different?
It’s manslaughter. Last prosecutor was an idiot
A grand jury is a group of citizens asked to determine if there's enough evidence for charges to be filed against someone.
Can't say exactly why the earlier charges were dismissed but the charges can be refiled because he was never found not guilty as there was never a trial. Until a trial actually takes place and a verdict entered, it's not double jeopardy to refile charges.
Wtf, so you can just keep asking new grand juries for 50 years until one decides you should be tried for murder? Holy shit.
You can't, the government can repeatedly attempt to idict you. A hung jury is also open for a second trial or even a third one. There are instances of people escaping conviction multiple times only for the government to try again and again until the person is convicted. You are either declared not guilty or you are capable of being found guilty until the end of time.
They can but if you're found Not Guilty once then they case is closed permanently.
They don't need a grand jury to charge anyone. It's mostly done to check the prosecution's case. So GJ ends up being kind of like a mock trial with no defense side presented. Like here is our case, sound good and worthy to you?
Then as other said, until a verdict comes in you can be charged at anytime for a murder.
This is why there is definitely a lot more damning evidence against Baldwin. If they didn’t have enough to charge him the grand jury would’ve bounced it out
> They don't need a grand jury to charge anyone
Grand Jury requirements vary by state. JFC -- the TV School of Law is actually worse than the Misc School of Law.
The earlier charges were dismissed because the FBI fricked up
They carefully redid the ballistics by reconstructing parts of that gun and said there's no way Baldwin couldn't have pulled the trigger
It makes sense they'd take a long time to consider what to finally go with for real because they get one chance to find him guilty and the likelihood of a conviction is not high for murder or even voluntary manslaughter.
I haven't really been following this because I don't care all that much, but was there ever any question that Baldwin pulled the trigger?
He's saying he didn't. The gun 'just went off in his hand oopsies'
The first investigation on the gun said this was possible so the case collapsed.
The reinvestigation says it is not.
He was using a modern repro of a Colt SAA. The original model of this gun could possibly go off by itself in some extreme circumstances. The modern repro eliminated them. Also the extreme circumstances would likely be him pointing the gun in the direction it fired and then bashing the dropped hammer with a fricking mallet.
Basically he's talking complete horseshit.
First case wasn't a slam dunk, so instead of risking a double jeopardy, they threw the first case out and now they're indicting him as the producer who hired the shitty untrained firearm 'specialist'
israeli nepotism
The Ultra Jury
it's a more unbiased way of determining if there's enough evidence to charge someone
so instead of just a DA looking at the investigation/evidence, it's a group of normies
it would be like if you gave all the receipts to Cinemaphile and asked them to come to a consensus
>i am not a cheeseburger
cheeseburger detected
>not a cheeseburger
so, you're a meat popsicle?
AGAIN? It was just some fricking Hoholina! Russians kill hundreds of these c**ts DAILY! What the frick do they want? He paid enough (at Denny's) already!
>It was just some fricking Hoholina!
Speaking of whom, has anyone drawn porn of her yet?
Well?
Why are Slavs forcing this gay meme? Poland isn’t a real country.
Baldbros...
We're gonna need a bigger 2for1 voucher
Nothing will happen
Screen cap this post
Edit: misspell
nor should anything happen. persecuting someone because they don't agree with your politics is fascism
If any of us shot and killed someone doesn’t matter if was a accident we’d get manslaughter charges. At the least criminal negligence
He shot 2 people and killed one. What are they putting on the death certificate? Killed by Gun? The fbi even tested the gun and said someone pulled the trigger.
Slow AF. Should have finished thumbing the hammer by the time the gun was pointed.
>twice
I can at least sort of understand if it happens once. Some frick puts live ammo in the gun, and you're dicking around and pull the trigger by accident. But twice? That shit is deliberate. He deliberately shot those people. There is no way you can convince me that after pulling the trigger once and shooting someone he said "wow, what are the odds? Well, lightning can't strike twice!" And pulls the trigger again.
One shot. Two people.
Please look up the basics of the case before participating.
This is what really solidifies his guilt to me. Especially considering the animosity he had towards the whole production team leading up to this, it seems like too much of a coincidence that he was given a magical gun that kills his enemies without him even pulling the trigger.
Someone post the court animation I think it was just 1 shot but I don’t remember for sure.
It was one bullet that passed through Hutchins and hit a producer as well I believe.
In cases like this they will put "accidental pointed trauma." Ask me how I know. When we shot Dallas at no point did we expect the talent to be liable for a firearm that we then ordered to point at another human being, often times close to their ears or face. Throwing the book at Baldwin requires everyone involved be arrested as an accessory, including the scriptwriter.
You’re an idiot
Clearly I was poking fun with the trauma comment. But it would be ruled accidental in cases like this. I am quite serious about the breaking of laws on set, it is like handing out speeding tickets at the Indy 500! Can you imagine?
Comparing a speeding ticket to recklessly pointing a real gun at someone and killing them? If I went hunting and accidentally shot and killed someone, frick yeah i’d be in jail
That homosexual was making the same disingenuous arguments in the last thread.
What is the job of the armorer on a film set, could you remind me? I think they have one job and one job only, but I can't quite remember what it is...
She wasn't present for a period of time because muh covid
Sounds awfully negligent. Almost criminally negligent, even. What was her job again?
Why are you being such a disingenuous dork?
The armorer already got charged cause she's just as liable as Baldwin is, there's no gotcha here.
Comparing going hunting to using a prop gun on a film set that someone else loaded with live ammunition without your knowledge, frick yeah the person who loaded that gun should be in jail.
Thank you friend
It wasn’t a prop gun you dumb frick. Been said dozen times on this thread alone. He was using a real fricking gun not a toy
If you had a camera crew following you and were being paid and instructed to point a firearm at somebody that was chcked safe, and this happened? No you should not go to jail. It is called a movie. Should Baldwin have also been charged with brandishing when he drew and pointed the firearm? Jee whiz!
Would you put a firearm that someone said was safe into your mouth and pull the trigger?
go on
Do you honestly assume the actor took someone else's word for it rather than see for himself that the gun was safe?
Further, is that even a real gun?
I think I see what he is showing here, with the firearm in the mouth. In my day on closeup shots a replica was almost never used. Details mattered back then. Also you cannot and should not have talent fussing with ammunition and possibly introducing a foreign objec into the barrell. Armorer is first and last line of defense, which is why we often were paid a liveable wage (unless you were Irish haha).
Nice LARP, but you fricked up the most simple detail.
I see that my typos may make some people uncomforatble when I have claimed to have led a privledged career as a Master armorer. Details matter indeed. I lost the tip of my left middle finger to an industry accident and try my best to check my "own" spelling but my eyes just aren't what they used to be.
>cant see
>shot himself
>master armorer
lmao
I started a long time ago. I learned firearms in the military during the war, and ended up in film after I had to leave Florida. Because I was good with English, I got a job prrof reading scripts and screenplays (not the same thing!). When Sal Nunzio took ill, I submitted my resume as I had firearms handing experience in Korea. Damnmeed if I didn't get it too. Putting it the way you do though makes it sound comical, certainly!
i actually believe you, i was mostly shitposting for fun. whats the weirdest/rarest gun youve fingerfricked?
>He fell for it
lmao
This is a good question. While I did not work this set, I once got to hold the so-called solid gold .45 in the Man with the Golden Gun. Obviously a custom job but pretty amusing to actually handle.
okay how about weirdest operation. im thinking like blow forward shit
This may disappoint you but most of my work ws pretty vanilla. When I started as an apprentice I got to know some of the fellows that worked on the old sci fi sets and used "ray guns" that had to be handled under the same rules.
If you are holding a firearm and you murder someone with it, you are guilty of manslaughter EVEN IF you thought it wasn't loaded. He shot that poor woman like a dog in the street.
Shia killed like 50 stray dogs and now he's basically a cardinal
The act has to be unlawful for it to be manslaughter. Firing a gun for a movie scene isn't unlawful.
Firing a gun into another person is unlawful regardless of if it’s for a movie scene.
It's not though. That's why they have to find an angle that makes it unlawful, like saying he didn't follow the safety procedures.
Yes it is. Shooting someone is unlawful. Put down the bong.
No it isn't liberal fricking moron. Context matters or do you think Kyle Rittenhouse shooting someone was unlawful?
I bet you suddenly have a lot to say about context you piece of shit.
Not that guy but Rittenhouse was found not guilty based on a jury of his peers.
Alec deserves the same treatment. Let a jury decide.
Nonetheless, many self defense shooting never see trial at all because the act of shooting someone is not explicitly unlawful in and of itself. Context always matters with the law.
He still has civil lawsuits pending, wonder when we'll hear more about those
Rittenhouse never should have gone to trial, the DA and ADAs in that case should be prosecuted or at the very least sued.
I’m pretty sure the safety procedures include “don’t shoot people”.
He pulled the trigger while there was a bullet inside and it was pointed at someone. That's the "angle" lmao.
It’s not that one actors fault that he killed Brandon Lee. There was a fragment in the chamber that popped out when the blank was fired. In this case, Alec is a producer and has a say in who the armorer is or is at least responsible for it. He pulled the trigger and the rumor is he may have ignored the gun safety stuff. Then he used the term “hot gun” which meant it had real bullets and George Clooney publically spoke out and said that it was a bullshit fake phrase that was never used in any film he worked in nor had he ever heard of it
>rumor is he may have ignored the gun safety stuff
yeah... they are going to say he was aware of live ammo being on set, live fire of prop weapons when not filming and then shooting a scene at all with the armorer not being on set.
If he was just an actor on set then there would be nothing to charge him with as the shooting itself wasn't really his fault. Yet as a producer and over all boss of the film he is held to a higher standard. So it sounds like this new case is if he ignored all the issues and set in motion a gross safety problem that resulted in a woman being killed on set. If that's the new case, it doesn't even mater who pulled the trigger.
That’s basically what indirect manslaughter is. Another word for criminal negligence. Which by all accounts entire set cutting corners, ignoring protocols, hiring people not fit for the job, to save money. Didn’t the armory woman get fired from another movie for negligence?
damn, even Clooney went after him? he's pretty left too, I'd have thought he'd stick by Alec
It was between takes. Alec had no reason to empty the gun into both the cinematographer AND the director. The sick frick. Maybe he thought it would be funny, but I'm not laughing.
>It’s only legal to fire when the camera is rolling
The camera’s not the only thing rolling
I’d imagine that are set of procedures you have to do which he should’ve known about. Checking the clip. Checking to make sure nothing is in the chamber. I never assume a gun is empty even if prop person told me it was.
Those are all things the armorer does. Actor’s can not and should not be responsible for distinguishing live rounds from blanks and duds. He is culpable as producer for allowing that eprostitute to be armorer in the first place, allowing her to turn safety into a joke, and allowing her to not be present when firearms were handled. He is not responsible for being the actor that pulled the trigger. You can’t blame an actor for blowing someone up if you hand them a stick of dynamite and tell them it’s a candle.
>allowing her to not be present when firearms were handled
No, the problem here is that HE proceeded to handle firearms when she wasn't, against the safety policy he no doubt had to read, and likely approved.
the eprostitute was on strike though
He was never told it was empty. He wasn’t even doing scene with the gun. He just picked the gun up which he had used for target practice earlier in the day and supposedly jokingly pointed it at the woman and shot her
Nobody said anything about empty. It wouldn’t make sense for the gun to be empty, it would either be loaded with blanks or duds.
The gun was handed to him by the AD. Like I said, as producer he is ultimately responsible, but not as the actor being handed a prop.
It was never handed to him. What part of that do you not get. He wasn’t even doing a scene where was going to use the gun. The gun still has the bullets in it when he went target shooting. He assumed that was emptied. But he never told it was.
Actually I set up a script so that when someone replied to that post, it would activate a small motor and fire a gun at a camera lady I have tied up in my living room. By replying tot that post you have caused the death of a woman. I am contacting the authorities, and you will be charged and jailed.
not even fricking close. He held a real gun to a woman's head, wienered the hammer back and sprayed her brains onto the ground.
>durrrrr but how could he have known it was loaded???
Not exactly an air tight defence to kill somebody and then say, "but the gun could have had no rounds in it so it's not my fault".
>It was never handed to him. What part of that do you not get
Now you're just blatantly lying lol
He picked the gun up and “jokingly” pointed it at lady and fired. He even said this and people on set stated this. He was never handed the gun. He wasn’t even filming a scene with the gun
It was handed to him by the assistant director and told it was ready and safe for use
That’s what he claimant. He also claimed he never pulled the trigger
I forget what he said before it. I know the cinematographer had made some snide remark to Alec and Alec turned it on her before firing. Would have been a funny bit had it not been a live round spraying her brains across the set.
You’re spreading misinformation. Although there have been claims that on-set firearms were used for plinking, there’s no evidence that Baldwin took part or that his pistol was used.
Why else would there be live rounds in the gun! Movies don’t use live wounds they use blanks. Only explanation for live rounds is that it was used for target shooting earlier.
He also had people quit the production because of near miss incidents so there's no way he was unaware of the risk.
Let's review:
>knows there have been hazards on set already
>has had firearm training on many films
>hired an incompetent as the armorer
>took a gun when the armorer wasn't even present
>they weren't even shooting a scene that needed the gun, they were establishing angles
>draws, aims and pulls the trigger on a gun as a 'joke'
>later lies that he didn't pull the trigger
>the gun is tested and this is seen to be impossible
>makes the Hutchins family buy their own breakfast at Dennys (contributes a 33% off coupon)
Send that fricker down, 20 years at least.
>makes the Hutchins family buy their own breakfast at Dennys (contributes a 33% off coupon)
Kek, is this true?
Yup
Those coupons aren't free you know.
Well actually they are free, but still, he could've kept it for himself.
Yeah, but the coupon was expired. It's the thought
>Actor’s can not and should not be responsible for distinguishing live rounds from blanks and duds.
Alright, then actors should be responsible for making sure a qualified armorer checks the gun on their behalf in their presence. Which he did not.
He was the producer of the movie. By all accounts, production was a shit show and massive negligence was going on to cut costs. Don’t act like this was some 200 million professional production. It cheap C movie at most. Idiot Baldwin took “prop” gun put shooting earlier than assumed the gun got emptied.
Well aparently heads are when Alec "the ripper" Baldwin is on set
>wasn't for a movie scene
>said "how I about I shoot you", pulled the gun out, aimed directly at her, and shot her
>made her family buy him dennys the day after
yeah, I'd say he killed her.
He was joking, but the callousness and disregard for human life displayed in his actions surely warrants criminal charges.
>The act has to be unlawful for it to be manslaughter
no it doesn't, manslaughter is intent to do something reckless that then caused a person's death, the reckless act doesn't have to be illegal. I remember a scenario my criminal law professor liked to use was at a rooftop new year's eve party someone sees a paint can and decides to throw it off the roof as a joke, but it hit someone on the street and killed them. Throwing a paint can isn't a crime, but it was definitely reckless.
If you ever go to court I hope you self-represent and that I get to see it.
There is no fricking
>unless it's for a movie scene!!
exception when it comes to involuntary manslaughter
The argument is he didn't know the gun was loaded, and that the context of the situation means he had a reason to be holding and dryfiring a gun whilst in the presence of other people.
>he didn't know the gun was loaded
And that is why you check the cylinder yourself before pointing it at someone and pulling the trigger, the same standard that anyone on Earth would be held to other than Alec Baldwin apparently
Sure but that's not a reasonable expectation of someone on a movie set. It's the job of the armourer to do that, and they bear the responsibility if the gun is loaded.
Yes it is. Firearm safety is the responsibility of anyone handling a firearm. This is why Alec Baldwin is about to get his butthole turned inside out in a state penitentiary
When it comes to filming movies and the like, the responsibility for guns fall on the armourer in most cases. They are the ones liable for the guns on set. It's their job to make sure they're not loaded.
It depends on the context in which he shot the person he killed. I've heard conflicting reports, one wherein he supposedly was waving the gun around between shoots and pointed it at some crewman and said "maybe I should just shoot you" and then blasted the sorry frick. If that's what happened, Baldwin is getting a voluntary manslaughter charge without question. But I have also heard that they were filming a scene where he needed to point the gun at the camera and pull the trigger, in which case he isn't at fault and will probably walk free. The core issue is intent. Did Baldwin intend to shoot someone, and was he misusing the gun on set.
>When it comes to filming movies and the like, the responsibility for guns fall on the armourer in most cases
Only in your mind it does. Or if you wish you can post the relevant New Mexico state law with this phantom exception you've dreamed uo
> Did Baldwin intend to shoot someone, and was he misusing the gun on set.
He would’ve been charged for murder is they thought he intended to shoot someone. He’s charged with indirect manslaughter. Again, criminal negligence. I guarantee there evidence he uses that same gun to go target shooting. Why has live ammo in it. No other reason why it had live ammo. That means he knew that gun had live bullets in it. Even if he was told he was clear he should’ve checked himself. Because that any non moron who used gun earlier to
shoot at targets would do. Fact is, the gun should’ve never left the set. Should’ve never had live bullets in it and should’ve been in a lock box. Baldwin running a shit show production
>Did Baldwin intend to shoot someone
Clearly not.
>was he misusing the gun
Obviously, because the fat c**t shot two people, killing one of them.
It is a reasonable expectation, though, to not aim, wiener and discharge the weapon while it’s pointed at someone, especially if you haven’t personally verified that it is safe to do so, and even then only if absolutely necessary.
If you were guilty of murder you would not be guilty of fricking manslaughter you absolute buffoon. You'd be guilty of murder, which is a different crime entirely and comes with its own requirements and of which there are varying degrees.
You people think you're smarter than everyone else but half of you don't even know what fricking words mean when you use them. Shut the frick up.
get a load of this moron. when Chauvin was convicted for saint fentanyl floyd he got 3rd + 2nd degree murder AND 2nd degree manslaughter. explain that one Black person
Explain what dipshit. Look it up yourself. It's not my job to repeatedly educate you you dumb inbred homosexual idiot moron brainlet dipshit.
>"you cannot be found guilty of murder and manslaughter"
>proved wrong
>"b-b-bbut bbbut bbbut look it up yourself"
ill accept your concession you projecting Black person
>noo explain the context of every court case ever to me right now
No. Learn something yourself moron. You're a pathetic subhuman embarrassment.
yes or no - was Derek Chauvin convicted of both murder and manslaughter?
What does it matter you dumb apeman?
Try to follow along buddy, it's hard for an obvious rightoid i know, but try to follow along just once. Don't just resort to insults, you aren't very good at it.
The original post in the chain said, if you murder someone with a gun you're guilty of manslaughter but that's not true, you could feasibly be guilty of murder, manslaughter, possibly both? Context matters moron.
Last post little guy!
you wrote a lot of words to dodge a simple "yes" or "no". are you ok? its a very simple question.
Because Wisconsin and Minnesota (don't remember which state it was, it's applicable to both regardless) are a radleft shitholes. California of the Midwest.
Following this logic, stuntdrivers should be charged with speeding and wreckless driving. I am not a fan of accidental deaths like this one, it is sad. But the fact remains that the armorer did not do her job. Also I understand the cinematographer was positioned ON PURPOSE in front of the muzzle. This is a no-no and usually worked around by using mirrors or water.
Stop acting like you know the fact. We don’t. What we do know is there is enough for a grand jury to think he should be charged. We can speculate. My personal theory is they have evidence he took that same gun out target practicing. You not explanation why a set gun would have live ammo in it. Likely he did tell armorer this because that’s against protocol. Set guns are suppose to be in a safe during filming and never to leave the set
We don't know if he went target shooting / practicing with it. The reports about that said it was crew members. But that is the prevailing theory about how live ammunition ended up in the gun. The Armorer didn't do their job properly.
As to the discharge, Baldwin is claiming he was practicing his draw as part of the set up for a scene and the gun just went off by itself with no input from him.
If you have some knowledge of the weapon he was using this is highly, highly unlikely. Nevertheless the original investigation concluded it was a possibility (either because they though they were using original colts or through [outside pressure]. Now they have reinvestigated and changed their mind.
So the armorer is being charged because the ammo being in their is her fault.
And Baldwin is being charged because he was holding it and pointing it at humans when it fired and it is currently believed the only way it could fire is if he worked the action.
Neither intended to cause a death so it is manslaughter.
Form what I heard as producer, Baldwin was one of the people that had access to the safe to the guns. I think strong possibility his arrogant ass took guns and went target shooting with crew and likely didn’t tell armorer because set guns are not to be used in such a manner. Reports show just massive incompetence going on at that set
It's not because of his politics it's because he killed someone
>his leftist politics are a liability
Does anyone actually believe this?
No it’s not fascism
The regime ruling over you and their propaganda apparatus frames everything they want you not do do as “fascist” and as you only know this pattern you now also call everything “fascist” you disagree with. The prosecution based on political views is an authoritarian trait and can be found in Bolshevism, fascism, theocratic orders, oligarchies, etc and as you live in an oligarchy also in your state.
If you not correctly name things you WILL go down, blindly lashing out, which is why nothing you or people like you do has done anything to stop the encroaching tyranny. Gl anon
I love reading the Reddit comments about this. Without prompting, Liberals on Reddit mention that Alec is only being "persecuted for insulting the orange dictator" or something along those lines. It reveals the truth behind their insistence that he's not guilty--they only believe so because he shilled for their side against Trump. Kind of scary all you have to do to get away with murder to a Liberal is be a fellow Liberal.
Schizo
Naive
Predditors are subhuman child gropers and trannies, what did you expect?
Had this been anyone else, you lot would be calling for the shooter's blood, saying they were responsible for checking the gun, treat all guns like they are loaded, etc.
amen. as a israeli man i whole heartedly agree with this statement
what are doing out of the oven?
apparently, literally everything. like god, but im real
That's life in general rather than fascism.
Yes I'm a fascist who'd like the sham system in place to work for me for a change.
The system in place is the only reason Republicans have even a remote shot at the White House in the first place. Only in America does the candidate with the least votes keep winning elections.
I'm pretty sure we don't have a libertarian in the white house but maybe I'm wrong.
Grand Jury indicted Killer Alec, but the Soros Prosecutor can still drop or settle.
He has to be stopped
kek
he will never go to jail though
Maybe the ruling billionaire elite doesn't find him a useful propagandist anymore.
Actions have consequences 🙂
Frick around and find out 🙂
>somehow the charges returned
Trump did that? Isn't that what biden's doing?
No, it's communism or american "liberalism."
Somebody must stop him!
>I will get you Pete, you will pay for this.
Someone post that tweet I can’t find it.
I know the one, Pete is in mighty trouble.
He's gonna kill a palestinian cinematographer next.
>what really happened to Jeremy Renner’s dick
How red is Montana? He might be fricked if he does a trial by jury there.
We like guns, weed, booze and Trump. Pretty sure he’s fricked unless the trial is in BozeAngeles.
> How red is Montana?
Since Baldwin murdered a woman in New Mexico, why would that matter?
So their hatred for him being liberal outweighs their gun protection agenda?
Did he ever get that guy that was ripping on him on twitter? He promised he would when he was exonerated.
I'll find you, Anon.
He's killed someone else?... He needs to be stopped
>There was a live round in the prop
People defending him are idiot. You point a gun at anyone and start pulling the trigger doesn’t matter if you think it’s empty. That’s at the minimum criminal negligence
I would have defended him if he shot at another actor during a scene they were filming but he shot at a staff member between takes.
Why would you defend him at all? He’s the one who hired the dumb b***h that gave him a loaded gun.
Hard as it may be to believe, women are responsible for their own actions.
Actors do that all the time.
Have you ever watched a movie?
They don’t shoot a gun off camera. The same gun they went target shooting earlier with. Do I think he intentionally tried to kill her. Course not. Still manslaughter. Only reason why he hasn’t been charged until now is because he’s a celebrity. He won’t get jail time because he’s a celeb
They were rehearsing a scene where he fires the gun at the camera which is a common shot in many movies
The gun is not even a gun, a prop gun is not a firearm, and is not something that should be expected to kill someone.
If he knew it was a real gun and had been shooting live ammo out of it, then he should have safety checked it, and he should have been educated how to use guns. If the director told him to use a live gun in a movie and he didn’t know how to operate it, the director should also be liable.
I refuse to believe he didn’t know how to use a real gun. He’s done tons to movies with guns. Only today that movies stop
using real gun. Meme of Samual L Jackson holding a toy gun which was CGI’d into gun in post production is what they do now. But this was a budget as frick movie that cut tons of corners
>The gun is not even a gun, a prop gun is not a firearm
A ‘prop gun’ is a non-firing, deactivated or replica weapon (hence ‘prop’) that is used for set dressing or costuming extras. They are controlled by the ‘Property master’ not the armorer.
The weapon used in this case was a fully functional, unmodified single-action revolver. Such weapons fall under the responsibility of the armorer, because they are to be handled and treated as live firearms at all times.
Stop referring to the weapon as a ‘prop’. It was not a prop weapon, it was a real gun.
>he should have safety checked it
No! The entire hollywood guide to firearms directly says to not have actors check anything as they could easily frick it up. They don't know guns and even something as simple as a check and easily have a mis-fire and that shots a blank wad and blinds a person or whatever.
the can watch the armorer load the gun, they can ask for it to be checked and shown to them before shooting but that's it. You should be doing actors with no guns. Hand gun from the pro to actor, actor shoots scene, hands gun back to pro.
I'd be willing to defend him if the armorer herself handed him the gun and told him it was empty. In that scenario I think it'd be fair for him to trust an expert. However in this scenario he received that information secondhand, which creates opportunity for dangerous miscommunication. At that point it was on him to either check it himself, or to have a qualified expert check it in his presence.
>gun-hating liberals defend another gun-hating liberal that shot someone because he hated guns to the point he had no idea how to handle one
He’ll get the martha stewart treatment.
He didn't fricknig do anything WRONG! They handed him a fricking prop! How does a live bullet even get into a prop weapon? Who has fricking live bullets on set? Where did they come from!
Are you idiot? It wasn’t a prop. It was a real gun. He used the same gun to go plinging earlier in the day
but baldwin bros...
he did everything right, he cried and bought dennys
Make Alec an honorary Russian - one less Ukrainian on earth!
Wtf amerimutt bros. I thought there was protection against double jeopardy?
Lawyer here. This is Double Jeopardy. If I was Alec's lawyer I would send a seasoned assist letter to the DA to stop this nonsense.
>seasoned assist letter
What kind of seasoning?
Interesting. What would you do if your client were John Kramer from the hit horror franchise Jigsaw? Would the charges stick?
Double jeopardy only applies once a court case is concluded and a verdict delivered. You’re not much of a fricking lawyer m8
It's Seize and Assist, you fricking moron.
>seasoned assist
lmao based, posts like this are a diamond dozen
Seriously though, Alec Baldwin should just fade into bolivian. His career is pretty much over. That train has sailed.
> fade into bolivian
Are you Mike Tyson?
Nope. But I sincerely think Baldwin shooting that lady was a blessing in the skies for him.
>Lawyer here.
Why do gun haters make movies trying to look cool with guns in the first place?
pfft... just tell the jury you compensated the deceased's loved ones fairly with a Denny's rooty tooty combo and kids meal... open and shut case
If they manage to get this to trial its going to get dismissed with prejudice by any judge. If the optics wouldn't be so terrible his legal team would file a civil suit against the state too
A Grand Jury thinks enough is enough evidence for a trail. Rarely does a judge ever dismiss a Gran Jury decision
The worst part about this is that it ensures 0 movies will use blanks from now on and it'll just be more post effect muzzle flash garbage like John Wick
its not a blank
its dummy rounds
but yea they are just gonna CGI everything now
> but yea they are just gonna CGI everything now
Anti gun Hollywood already was regardless of this
I hate that shit
Mannbros... it's over.
Why exactly to guns sound so loud/realistic in mann's films? Special kind of ammo that's different from blanks?
Some directors just understand that loud effects translate to an audience reaction and others dont/don't care. Mann has been directing for decades and he does thrillers, he just understands these things are important.
Probably good sound design. The sounds from gunshots happen so quickly that microphones can't pick them up properly. Check out any guntuber's videos.
Oh no! Wait -- that doesn't affect the viewer and is safer. That is actually a good thing.
Denny,s. is too FRICKING expensive now, wtf.
Exactly, that’s why Alec splurged and got everyone grand slams.
he probably didn’t get out of there for under $60 + tip. That’s nothing to sneeze at.
>NOOOO you used a gun you had all good reasons to think was loaded with blanks but some moronic technician put REAL bullets without you being omniscient and figuring it out so you killed someone without meaning to and now we have to prosecute you to your grave because our country is obsessed with endless trials and everything in our shitty decadent country is about MONEY and we don't give a shit about what's simply right NOOOOOOO
>whines that everything is about money
>spends all his free time simping for the ultra wealthy on the internet
Wow you really showed me, what a flawless argument there, surely it all makes senses and disproves my point, moron.
PANCAKES. I BOUGHT THEM FRICKING PANCAKES AND THE GREEDY DEGENERATES WANT MORE FROM ME
what is it with liberals getting so defensive when the people go against blatant murderers and psychopaths?
they think (correctly) that they're in danger of people coming after them next. that's why so many of those leftie journos were outed as sex pests
Baldwin should go on Hannity and say nice things about Trump, then dipshits like you would be sucking his dick and defending him relentlessly.
he just wanted to know how it felt to kill
>involuntary manslaughter
Doesn't manslaughter already mean involuntary murder?
Yes and no. Like if your drive drunk and kill someone that’s straight up manslaughter. No, you didn’t intentionally want to kill someone. But you knew driving drunk would increase the likely hood that it would happen. With Baldwin, basically just criminal negligence
Being handed a loaded gun by the person you shot would be criminal negligence on that person’s part.
There is obviously a lot more to what actually happened that we don’t know. You don’t get a grand jury indictment especially in a high profile case like without more than sufficient evidence to warrant a trail. Tells me there is a lot evidence that Baldwin fricked up
wacky odd couple sitcom where baldwin and trump are prison cellmates
Featuring visits from: Epstein's (body double's) ghost and Big Harv.
alec is a chud who has shown nothing but disrespect and contempt for firearms thousands of times over the years. he's never taken them seriously, and now he murdered someone due to his negligence. he's even threatened people with physical violence after being charged. pretty clear and cut case. lock him up.
And an insultingly low bribe of the bereaved family
Dennys is high class now with Brandon running things.
oh good the detectives from Cinemaphile are on the case
soon we'll find out if the armorer's feet are lickable or not and turn this whole case around
>we'll find out if the armorer's feet are lickable or not
Well are they??
Maybe his Hiss-panic waifu should stage another meltdown to keep him as a cheerleader for Newsom. A big year needs Alec by Gavin's side!
He’ll do community service by teaching a class on gun safety to other actors.
Finally some good news today
Fact is, gun had live ammo in it. Why would a set gun have live ammo. Only explanation is it was used for target practice earlier. Using a movie gun for target practice alone is negligence. From what I read, set guns to be locked job a box with zero ammo in it during non filming. There no reason for that gun to ever had live ammo
Friend this is fundementally wrong. I was master armorer on the set of Dallas for 3 seasons and I can tell you that it was not uncommon to have red shot on set. There is also no such thing as a movie gun. A firearm is a firearm and it was not uncommon to load red shot when training the talent to simulate recoil.
>There is also no such thing as a movie gun.
But there are prop guns.
> was master armorer on the set of Dallas
I don’t believe you but let’s say for the sake of argument. Why would a set gun have real ammo in it?
It is not a "set gun" but a gun used on a set. Same as my hat is not a soup bowl. See? But anyway, we often would instruct talent in the proper handinling of firearms in the sense of reacting to recoil by using red shot before we went with the blanks on set.
Oh shut up. Baldwin didn’t need to learn how to use a gun. He’s been using guns his entire career. Mark my words, it’s going to shown he took that gun off set for target practice and why it had live ammo
It really has nothing with lerning how to use the gun, but more about realistic recoil effects that are best simulated after feeling the real "deal." Or else you can have an embarassing situation like Mr. Washburn had with Sorpranos.
I don't get it. Shouldn't the prop people be charged with handing an actor a loaded gun? The actor relies on them to do their job, he didn't know it was loaded. The guy who shot Brandon Lee didn't get charged with anything, the situation is no different
Armorer was charged too, yes. All of them are culpable up to and including Baldwin
>prop people
Prop guns are deactivated or replica weapons used for set dressing and by extras, and are the responsibility of the property master.
Blank firing and operational weapons are to be treated as live and loaded at all times and are the responsibility of the armorer.
The claim that the weapon was a prop gun is completely incorrect and misleading. It was a real, unmodified, functional weapon and the failure of the armorer, AD and actor to treat it as such is what led to the shooting. All three parties bear responsibility for the shooting through criminal negligence and Baldwin is right to be held to account for his failure to abide by basic gun safety rules and SAG-AFTRA safe handling guidelines.
So no, the prop people bear no responsibility but the armorer sure does.
He's innocent
It's illegal to shoot people to death. For Alec, it's all over.
he seems like an angry dude
Still doesn't make me forget about Matthew Broderick's fatal car accident that killed two women in Ireland in 1987.
I don’t know how he didn’t get jail for that. Right, he’s a celeb
He loves to kill. But it's okay because he takes the victim's families to Dennys.
I bet there is video or pictures of Baldwin target practicing with the gun.
good. never liked him. never thought he was funny. phil hartman mogged him without even trying. i hope he dies alone and sad.
Can you use 'Their case is so weak they dropped it before' as part of your defense?
We have no idea what evidence the prosecution has. What we do know is it was ending for a gram jury to file charges. So that tells me it’s way more than circumstantial. Prosecution not going to go forward in a high profile case like this unless feel they have enough without a doubt to charge him
What about the armorer chick? Has she been charged?
Post Baldwinkino
well he did shoot and kill someone
Why are r*ghtoids so absolutely gleeful about the prospect of Baldwin going to jail for this? It's not really because he made fun of Trump, right?
I don't think you can get jail time for making fun of Trump
However you can get jail time for killing people
Hope this helps
Is that supposed to somehow answer the question of
>Why are r*ghtoids so absolutely gleeful about the prospect of Baldwin going to jail for this? It's not really because he made fun of Trump, right?
Or did you respond to the wrong post?
I'm a libtard and want him to go to jail
I don't care about politics I just hate smug celebrities
Why are there so many morons defending someone who literally killed someone with a gun?
All the lefties want to give him a pass because he mocked trump. A few gays are just harvesting yous
The craziest thing about this story is that the armorer got several more roles after this happened.
#Girlboss
Are you telling me that breakfast at Wendy's was not compensation enough?!?
He thought he made the husband pay
A grand jury is not going to serve indictment if there is no evidence for what the person is being charged with. That’s a fact. It’ll be up to a jury now to decide.
What I find funny is you know Baldwin cheering Trump getting bogus charges and thrown off the ballet. Yet he’s one shot killed someone
ABC
ALWAYS
BLASTING
CINEMATOGRAPHERS
What are the odds that Alec Baldwin was just involved in a freak accident, and that he is not actually guilty of intentionally murdering someone? Does that seem to be the case, here? What happens after someone is charged with involuntary manslaughter?
> What are the odds that Alec Baldwin was just involved in a freak accident,
Not likely. If that was the case he would’nt have gotten an indictment. People on here obviously don’t grasp significance of that. Prosecutor has to convince a jury that enough evidence to charge him. Jury can’t agree on shit most the time. I expected them throw it out on lack of evidence. The fact they didn’t tells me there is a lot evidence
He lied about pulling the trigger. He's fricked.
it's funny when they make their bed then lie in it
It is a situation where the authorities know a lot more to this than we do, then, it seems. Alec might in fact have intended it.
A lie is quite damning.
He would’ve been charged with murder if they had evidence he intended to kill her. I’ll stand by my theory that they have proof he took gun target shooting. Ignored protocols. He’s such an arrogant butthole this is not a stretch
Would a lovemaking scene be handled as a rape? Jesus wept, you people. Use your heads. If i jerked off before laying on top of Jamie Lee Curtis for a sex scene and her moist vag reconstituted my dried sperm such that they achieved conception, am I now a rapist? Or even the father?
You suck at analogies. Not single one compare to blowing a lady’s head off
God damn, were you dropped on your head? Read between the lines. A crime happened in my scenario. A LOADED GUN. Get it? My wiener? It was a metaphor for a loaded pistol. And somebody got hurt (JLC). You were saying something about sucking at analogies?
bump
He really roasted you anon
No you didn't.
If the simple fact that he got indicted means there's likely more than enough evidence to convict, what does that mean for Trump and his 91 felony indictments across four separate criminal investigations?
that doesn't count because it's the Deep State trying to bring Trump down/make him lose the election
Trumped up charges mean nothing. Anything to prevent him winning again. Where as Alec killed someone and its not even in dispute.
Four separate grand juries. Four separate series of indictments. 91 felonies. But sure, it's all just "fake news" lmao
and still innocent until proven guilty. Call me when there is a guilty verdict you donkey raping shit eater
What a stretch coming form same people head inquest on Trump being a Russian agent which proved bullshhit. FBI and DOJ who lied about Hunter Bidens laptop. Same people trying to remove Trump from state ballots. Nothing going on.
>desperate attempt to change the subject
To the surprise of absolutely no one.
No, totally difference circumstances. One involving a political party trying to rig election other butthole celeb that killer someone.
>Four separate grand juries. Four separate series of indictments. 91 felonies. But sure, it's all just "fake news" lmao
>No dude the courts in Soviet Russia were totally fair bro they had a legal process and everything that means it's all good!
>No dude those four completely different grand juries were all just Democrat plants, it's all fake news you'll see! Just two more weeks!
>DA and Prosector both proven to be corrupt
But nah man it's totally fine in the USSA.
What's the deal with you morons thinking the more charges brought against someone the more valid those charges are? I bet if they said there were 2 billion charges against him, you would feel that much more certain that he was going away. Alex Jones owes 999 sextillion dollars to Sandy Hook for saying something weird was going on there? That's just 999 sextillion reasons he's a bad guy lmao. Try to grow a brain you fricking moron.
Charged by same people accused him working for Russians. Pee tape. Said Hunter Biden lap top was Russian disinformation. That compare January 6 to 9-11. Trump entirely different matter. pure election interference. Baldwin, nothing to gain by prosecutors. Guarantee they’re liberal as frick. I’m betting most people on grand jury were liberal and probably love Baldwin.
It’s not a ‘freak accident’ when multiple safety processes and rules are ignored.
Wonder if Trump was filming a commercial and using a set gun shot and killed someone on set how that would’ve went down
Right-wingers would be bending over backwards to defend him, regardless of the facts of the case.
Every lefty homosexual would be calling for his public execution.
Like r*ghtoids are for Baldwin because he made fun of your god-emperor?
yes he should be executed for mocking trump, not this
I'm not even American. I'm just extremely aware your ilk has no real morals and that as long as your "team" does something it's alright.
someone post the CGI recreation of the death
>both anons saying he would be acquitted and anons saying he would be found guilty were right
>for the first time ever Cinemaphile was right
no you don't get it. we NEED a female armor-ACK
No matter how rediculous it sounds to have a loaded fricking gun on a movie set. He still killed someone. That lady is dead. Her son will grow up without a fricking mother. And even worse, kids will make fun of this kid because it was Alec Baldwin who did it.
>WHAT IS THE CHARGE?
>A SUCCULENT DENNY'S MEAL?