Alec Baldwin shoots and kills cinematographer.

rtk11 said:
This in addition to other reports that the crew were using these "props" (really firearms) for target practice/shooting ("recreational purposes") after is pretty alarming. I would imagine the armorer should have kept any firearm in control and in her custody or supervision at all times. How it came to be out of her custody and sight, and laid on a cart loaded with live ammunition where the Assistant Director handed it to the actor is unfathomable. It appears that nobody checked/cleared the firearm, including Baldwin, and that error chain is what led to this incident.
Click to expand...

There are standard procedures for the handling of functional firearms as props. Had competent staff followed those procedures, this incident would not have happened.

Now, this was deadly because a live round (or squib + 1/1 blank) ended up in the barrel. Even 'just' a blank in a firearm handled as 'cold' can have bad consequences. The energy contained in a full load blank is the same as in a live round. When fired directly towards a person at close proximity it can still do substantial damage. So even if this had been a blank that he inadvertently fired, it would be inexcusable and people should get fired left and right (and excluded from that line of work until they learn their craft).
 
bflynn said:
A man unfamiliar with guns gets handed one and there’s an accident. Who could predict that?

guns are always loaded.
Click to expand...

This is precisely why I took my daughter shooting at an early age. My hope was that even if she didn’t like shooting as a hobby (she did), she’d learn about guns, the cardinal rules of gun safety, and the potential consequences of shooting one. My hope was that at a minimum, she wouldn’t be the kid that finds a gun at a friend’s house and plays with it, resulting in a tragic outcome.
 
Omalley1537 said:
This is precisely why I took my daughter shooting at an early age. My hope was that even if she didn’t like shooting as a hobby (she did), she’d learn about guns, the cardinal rules of gun safety, and the potential consequences of shooting one. My hope was that at a minimum, she wouldn’t be the kid that finds a gun at a friend’s house and plays with it, resulting in a tragic outcome.
Click to expand...
Good point. I would add to that 'or knows what to do if the other kid starts to play with it.'
 
Robert Gee said:
Many of the guns in Star Wars were "real guns."
Click to expand...

Han Solo's blaster was famously mocked up by the prop shop from an 1896 Broomhandle Mauser, the first commercially-successful semiautomatic pistol. That particular prop gun, with the shoulder stock, had previously been used by Frank Sinatra in the movie "The Naked Runner"
Both stars are see exhibiting poor trigger discipline. Hollywood, eh?
blaster1-660x371.jpg


dbe08b.jpg


the-naked-runner-sinatra-mauser-1990918866.jpg
 

Attachments

  • hansolo2.jpg
    hansolo2.jpg
    75.5 KB · Views: 23
PPC1052 said:
It's not about a cap. It's a question of the exclusivity of the remedy of worker's compensation.

If there is co-worker immunity, again it won't matter. You can't sue him. In my state, the court would even lack subject matter jurisdiction over the claim. If there is no such immunity in this case, no doubt you are correct-- they would sue him. But again, doubtful his personal insurance would pay. It will almost certainly be resolved within the limits of the production company's insurance.

Ok, I have been a litigator for over 25 years, all of them in the insurance defense industry defending claims exactly like that, as well bringing subrogation claims on behalf of the insurance carriers. I have never once seen a liability carrier subrogate for payments on behalf of their insured. Not saying it has never happened. But I am saying it isn't common. One problem is that the carrier steps into the shoes of it's insured, and would therefore be barred by the fault of its own insured.

In most states, it is not even permitted to subrogate against your own insured.
Click to expand...


Perhaps we're talking past each other, but it was always my experience working in the insurance industry that if there was an at-fault 3rd party, the insurance company will nearly always subrogate against them in order to recover claims they have paid on behalf of their insured. Big banner on the wall of the claims department said "Think Subro".

Not to say that's likely in this case, but as I said, the investigation isn't complete.
 
GaryM said:
Both stars are see exhibiting poor trigger discipline. Hollywood, eh?
the-naked-runner-sinatra-mauser-1990918866.jpg
Click to expand...

Han had to. Otherwise Greedo would have shot him first.

Meanwhile, I believe manslaughter is the proper charge for Baldwin.
 
Chip Sylverne said:
Perhaps we're talking past each other, but it was always my experience working in the insurance industry that if there was an at-fault 3rd party, the insurance company will nearly always subrogate against them in order to recover claims they have paid on behalf of their insured.
Click to expand...
Yes, but that's for property coverage, med pay, health insurance, and other types of first party claims (where the insurance company pays their own insured), not liability coverage where the carrier is paying a claim out to a third party due to the fault of their policy holder.
 
PPC1052 said:
Yes, but that's for property coverage, med pay, health insurance, and other types of first party claims (where the insurance company pays their own insured), not liability coverage where the carrier is paying a claim out to a third party due to the fault of their policy holder.
Click to expand...

Certainly you aren't saying that no insurance company has ever subrogated to recover personal injury payment made on a product liability claim?
 
Lachlan said:
Apparently there was at least some news coverage indicating that there were 28 shootings. Doesn’t that count?
Click to expand...

Since no details were given in the 28 shootings...no names of victims, shooters, time of day or night...I would have to say No...this does not count as news coverage compared to this one.
 
Let's say for argument's sake there was some defect in this weapon that caused it to discharge more easily than it should. Call it hair trigger. Would this manufacturer then be a likely target for subrogation of a liability claim paid by the production company insuror?
 
Doug Reid said:
Since no details were given in the 28 shootings...no names of victims, shooters, time of day or night...I would have to say No...this does not count as news coverage compared to this one.
Click to expand...

As an aside, why do we never hear details of traffic fatalities in Manila?

Which would be about as as relevant to this thread as the reporting of Chicago shooting deaths.
 
Chip Sylverne said:
Certainly you aren't saying that no insurance company has ever subrogated to recover personal injury payment made on a product liability claim?
Click to expand...
Are you talking about the product manufacturer/seller's insurance company paying a claim to an injured consumer? If so, then I have never seen it. I have seen indemnity claims, and in some states, there are contribution claims between joint tortfeasors. (If I had to guess, that's probably what you are thinking of.) I have seen claims for coverage as an additional insured on another party's insurance policy. But I have never seen a liability carrier subrogate for a third party claim.
 
I love Pilots of America. Where else could you learn a new word like tortfeasor?
 
PPC1052 said:
Are you talking about the product manufacturer/seller's insurance company paying a claim to an injured consumer?
Click to expand...

A family member suing an airplane manufacturer because their pilot didn't know to put gas in the plane sounds like an example.
 
As more information comes out about this "accident", I strongly believe it has crossed the line into criminal negligence. There is no reason a "prop" gun should have been used by film crew for plinking. From everything I've read, live ammo should have never been anywhere near the set according to industry guidelines. That kind of lax attitude has no place around firearms.
 
I give "legal experts" in "news" articles the same weight I give "aviation experts" and "gun experts".
 
Palmpilot said:
Could Alec Baldwin Be Charged Over Rust Shooting? Legal Expert Weighs In
A legal expert tells PEOPLE whether Alec Baldwin could face criminal or civil charges following the death of cinematographer Halyna Hutchins

https://people.com/movies/could-alec-baldwin-be-charged-over-rust-shooting-legal-expert-weighs-in/
Click to expand...

From the article:

Baldwin was told the gun was "cold," meaning there was no live round in it, by assistant director Dave Halls before Halls handed the prop firearm to Baldwin, according to a search warrant affidavit from the Santa Fe Sheriff's Office.
Click to expand...

Second time I've said this but I believe there is a bus in Mr. Halls future ...
 
DaleB said:
I give "legal experts" in "news" articles the same weight I give "aviation experts" and "gun experts".
Click to expand...
I usually give the opinions of attorneys more weight on legal questions than I do the opinions of most non-attorneys.
 
So instead of Hollywood blaming the shooter, and saying that these overpaid actors need to at least take a $500 - free firearms safety class before handling a firearm on set, same course the little middle class grandma who wants to buy a gun for self defense takes, but no Hollywood blames the inanimate object.

This is why I laugh when a Hollywood person talks about politics or the environment, their lack of anything resembling a sliver of logic or responsibility is amazing
 
Chip Sylverne said:
Let's say for argument's sake there was some defect in this weapon that caused it to discharge more easily than it should. Call it hair trigger. Would this manufacturer then be a likely target for subrogation of a liability claim paid by the production company insuror?
Click to expand...
That still would require a finger on the trigger. And that would be the, ahem, smoking gun.
 
FastEddieB said:
As an aside, why do we never hear details of traffic fatalities in Manila?

Which would be about as as relevant to this thread as the reporting of Chicago shooting deaths.
Click to expand...

Last time I checked, Manila is not in the USA and what the heck does traffic fatalities have to do with fatal shootings ?

If Baldwin was not part of the story, this thread would have ended on page one.
The innocent people killed every weekend never get news coverage unless they have celebrity status...that was my point...why all the attention to this and no details of all the others....you don't get it .
 
midwestpa24 said:
As more information comes out about this "accident", I strongly believe it has crossed the line into criminal negligence.
Click to expand...

Disclaimer: I am not licensed to practice law in New Mexico.

I believe that the proper charge, if there will be one (and I am not saying there should be), is involuntary manslaughter:

30-2-3. Manslaughter.

Manslaughter is the unlawful killing of a human being without malice.

A. Voluntary manslaughter consists of manslaughter committed upon a sudden quarrel or in the heat of passion.

Whoever commits voluntary manslaughter is guilty of a third degree felony resulting in the death of a human being.

B. Involuntary manslaughter consists of manslaughter committed in the commission of an unlawful act not amounting to felony, or in the commission of a lawful act which might produce death in an unlawful manner or without due caution and circumspection.

Whoever commits involuntary manslaughter is guilty of a fourth degree felony.​

NM Stat § 30-2-3 :: Section 30-2-3: Manslaughter. :: 2011 New Mexico Statutes :: US Codes and Statutes :: US Law :: Justia

There has been a case upholding a conviction for an unintentional discharge of a firearm under that statute: State v. Gilliam :: 1955 :: New Mexico Supreme Court Decisions :: New Mexico Case Law :: New Mexico Law :: US Law :: Justia

In that opinion, the court upheld an involuntary manslaughter conviction and explained:

It could have made no difference to the trial of a charge of involuntary manslaughter as to who loaded the gun or whether the person handling the gun was sober or drinking or whether he had loaded the gun while drinking intoxicants. All that it is necessary to establish for involuntary manslaughter by the use of a loaded firearm is that a defendant had in his hands a gun which at some time had been loaded and that he handled it, whether drunk, drinking or sober, without due caution and circumspection and that death resulted. (emphasis added.)​
 
Last edited:
Chip Sylverne said:
Let's say for argument's sake there was some defect in this weapon that caused it to discharge more easily than it should. Call it hair trigger. Would this manufacturer then be a likely target for subrogation of a liability claim paid by the production company insuror?
Click to expand...

No. But it would make them a potential target by the estate in a wrongful death claim.

Again, I am not licensed in New Mexico. But here is the statute on contribution among joint tort feasors. New Mexico Statutes Section 41-3-2 (2020) - Right of contribution; accrual; pro rata share. :: 2020 New Mexico Statutes :: US Codes and Statutes :: US Law :: Justia

However, New Mexico seems to have adopted a comparative fault regime, whereby the jury apportions fault among the tortfeasors. When that happens, each defendant only pays their proportion of the fault allocated to them by the jury. In such circumstances, contribution does not apply. See, Amrep Sw., Inc. v. Shollenbarger Wood Treating, Inc., 119 N.M. 542, 893 P.2d 438 (1995).
 
Last edited:
Chip Sylverne said:
Let's say for argument's sake there was some defect in this weapon that caused it to discharge more easily than it should. Call it hair trigger. Would this manufacturer then be a likely target for subrogation of a liability claim paid by the production company insuror?
Click to expand...
IMO, only if the gun were unmolested but not for a hair trigger. That's a feature not a defect.
 
Doug Reid said:
If Baldwin was not part of the story, this thread would have ended on page one.
The innocent people killed every weekend never get news coverage unless they have celebrity status...that was my point...why all the attention to this and no details of all the others....you don't get it .
Click to expand...

If Baldwin were not part of the story, the non elite moron who pointed a gun and pulled the trigger would be up on charges now. Different rules for Alec apparently.
 
PaulS said:
If Baldwin were not part of the story, the non elite moron who pointed a gun and pulled the trigger would be up on charges now. Different rules for Alec apparently.
Click to expand...

Yeah, you might be correct. It's always tough to say whether celebrity helps or hurts in situations like this. No doubt we would have never hear of this but for his celebrity. Would a non-celebrity be charged? Hard to say. I could see where it could happen and no one would ever notice. I can also see a situation where the state doesn't bother because there isn't a bunch of news coverage of the story where they feel like they have to do something. I just leave it at that before it gets too spin zone worthy.
 
GaryM said:
Han Solo's blaster was famously mocked up by the prop shop from an 1896 Broomhandle Mauser, the first commercially-successful semiautomatic pistol. That particular prop gun, with the shoulder stock, had previously been used by Frank Sinatra in the movie "The Naked Runner"
Both stars are see exhibiting poor trigger discipline. Hollywood, eh?
blaster1-660x371.jpg


dbe08b.jpg


the-naked-runner-sinatra-mauser-1990918866.jpg
Click to expand...
Han shot first.
 
Doug Reid said:
Since no details were given in the 28 shootings...no names of victims, shooters, time of day or night...I would have to say No...this does not count as news coverage compared to this one.
Click to expand...
Doug Reid said:
Last time I checked, Manila is not in the USA and what the heck does traffic fatalities have to do with fatal shootings ?

If Baldwin was not part of the story, this thread would have ended on page one.
The innocent people killed every weekend never get news coverage unless they have celebrity status...that was my point...why all the attention to this and no details of all the others....you don't get it .
Click to expand...

Thats called being spoon fed. Did you hunt or gather? Its out there if you really cared to find it. Did you relate this to a man in Lexington that shot at police? Or the argument that turned deadly in Duplin County in the last few days? Ive got more, looks like about 20 the last few days in NC.
But ya, this is as sensationalized as an attractive missing white woman. And Manila is AS ABSURD to this as Chicago.
 
Last edited:
PaulS said:
If Baldwin were not part of the story, the non elite moron who pointed a gun and pulled the trigger would be up on charges now. Different rules for Alec apparently.
Click to expand...
If the locals are considering charges, you can bet that all of their ducks will be in alignment prior to that announcement.
 
bflynn said:
A man unfamiliar with guns gets handed one and there’s an accident. Who could predict that?

guns are always loaded.
Click to expand...

Unfamiliar?
No

Baldwin has been “playing” with guns for probably longer than I have been alive, made millions from it, he’s just careless, and somehow in the wacky world of today that’s someone other than Baldwins fault

Departed+1.jpg


3c50287bee249d59dc4218bbdedfb475


df515c6dabf077ca0e224ab4b7ff0491.jpg


15447482.jpg


c6de7c2f72fced71e4f3bee10e826e8d.jpg


get+001.jpg


Why-WAS-a-gun-on-Alec-Baldwin-movie-set-loaded.jpg


https://m.imdb.com/name/nm0000285/
 
...that reminds me he should have been indicted for murdering the screenplay in that horrible remake of The Getaway!
ITALIAN259-2.jpg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top