How to Get Away with Murder - Alec Baldwin Discussion

[–] JoWilli (19957) 3 years ago

are we done with Alec already? who are we talking about now?

reply

[–] Reeveman (182) 3 years ago

Plenty of conversation on Kyle but not much anymore for this murderer and none for the one that plowed his vehicle through a crowd and killed six. Go figure.

reply

[–] JoWilli (19957) 3 years ago

yeah, thats just how the liberal news works.

reply

[–] MovieChatUser497 (18943) 3 years ago

Yep if you toe the libtard agenda then you are basically allowed to kill whoever you want, but if you don't then if you defend yourself against libtards who are trying to kill you then you are the murderer. I swear liberals have the most backwards ass fuck logic I have ever heard.

reply

[–] legnadibrom (6214) 3 years ago

we will never let the embers extinguish on Alec

reply

[–] JoWilli (19957) 3 years ago

I hope so. he killed a person and he is acting like its no big deal.

reply

[–] Bubbathegut (18045) 3 years ago

Looks like they went out, no one cares anymore that he killed someones mom.

reply

[–] legnadibrom (6214) 3 years ago

i decidedly disagree

reply

[–] JoWilli (19957) 3 years ago

the mainstream media agrees and thats all that matters...

reply

[–] legnadibrom (6214) 3 years ago

we will never let Alec off for this atrocity

reply

[–] Bubbathegut (18045) 3 years ago

More people are talking about the slap than Alec killing a person.

reply

[–] legnadibrom (6214) 2 years ago

then we better fix that

reply

[–] JoWilli (19957) 2 years ago

people forgot again.

reply

[–] legnadibrom (6214) 2 years ago

& you have helped us to rectify that

reply

[–] JoWilli (19957) 2 years ago

people forgot. but then didnt forget...

reply

[–] JoWilli (19957) 2 years ago

we forgot

reply

[–] jcnyclv (1556) 2 years ago

No we didn't forget! He shot someone and should be held fully accountable. IMO his wife's latest pregnancy is a disgusting attempt to divert attention from the shooting issue. They've been posting on social media how happy they are about the pregnancy. Such vile people!

reply

[–] Windsaar (324) 2 years ago

He was held as accountable as deserved to be though.

Just because some not-so-smart people can't tell the difference between murder and an accident causing death doesn't mean there's no difference.
It simply means that some people are so desperate for ANY shred of attention whatsoever, they throw all logic and sense out the window.
Attention in passing from complete strangers for a couple of minutes online is (for some reason) worth appearing ignorant (or just plain ol' stupid) forever to some people.

I wonder what society would be like if common sense was more common and less of an astronomically rare phenomenon?

reply

[–] jcnyclv (1556) 2 years ago

"He was held as accountable as deserved to be though." Um, no.

It's in the hands of the Santa Fe's DA's office. Nothing has been decided yet. I wonder what society would be like if people knew what they were talking about??

reply

[–] Windsaar (324) 2 years ago

What is it they're talking (or not talking about)
Other than a prop misfire, I mean.

reply

[–] jcnyclv (1556) 2 years ago

They're deciding, based on the evidence, whether or not any criminal charges should be brought against him. He pulled the trigger which resulted in death. It certainly wasn't intentional murder but it was extreme negligence. And then he lied about pulling the trigger. Hopefully the DA will make the right decision.

reply

[–] Bubbathegut (18045) 3 years ago

It worked and he is not in trouble too. So yeah, he got away with murder.

reply

[–] LennyNero (498) 2 years ago

“Murder” implies intent, and I haven’t heard anything about this case that even suggests that it was intentional. I think Bubbathegut just loves wildly throwing words and accusations out into the air; believing that if he says it loudly enough, it’ll make it true.

This is manslaughter (non-intentional, accidental), and THAT’S what was being investigated. No one there wanted anyone to die. They wanted to complete the filming of a movie…and go on with their rich lives. Baldwin’s personal politics have nothing to do with this situation, and it feels weird feeling a need to say that.

reply

[–] Windsaar (324) 2 years ago

He's never murdered anyone though. Not to anybodies knowledge, anyway.
There was an accident on one of his film sets that caused a death, but there wasn't any murder or anything.

Crazy how full on adults are struggling to understand the difference lol.
Some are just grasping at straws in an attempt to troll... While I suspect others for REAL don't know the difference lol.

reply

[–] Bubbathegut (18045) 2 years ago

He pointed a gun at someone and pulled the trigger. The FBI already concluded that the trigger was pulled. He should at least be charged for manslaughter. If he is not guilty then why did he settle out of court and not go to trial?

reply

[–] jcnyclv (1556) 2 years ago

He settled civilly out of court with the family. The Santa Fe's DA's office still has the criminal case and hasn't made a decision yet. There is still a chance for some type of justice.

https://abcnews.go.com/Entertainment/rust-shooting-investigation-handed-district-attorney-charges/story?id=92216097

reply

[–] [deleted] 2 years ago

It was manslaughter. He killed her because of recklessness, but I can't see any evidence that he intended to kill her.

reply

[–] strntz (12223) 2 years ago

It doesn't rise to manslaughter either unless he knew the gun was loaded, and so far, no one has said he was aware that a live round was loaded into that gun.

reply

[–] April-151-CT (10210) 2 years ago

He's never going to be held criminally liable for this. Civilly is a different matter since he's a producer on the film. The person or people ultimately responsible for this is whoever brought live rounds onto the set and loaded it into the gun. Period.

reply

[–] [deleted] 2 years ago

Not true. They were violationg major rules for handling guns on set. The armorer wan't even present on the set that day, much less checking the guns with the actor.

reply

[–] April-151-CT (10210) 2 years ago

I'm not sure why you think she wasn't there that day....

https://abc7.com/rust-movie-set-shooting-new-details-prop-master/11910857/

reply

[–] [deleted] 2 years ago

She didn't give the gun to Baldwin. She didn't check it. She wasn't there where they were shooting. By on set I mean where they were shooting, with Baldwin. overseeing it directly.

reply

[–] April-151-CT (10210) 2 years ago

Regardless...
The one(s) ultimately responsible are whoever brought live rounds onto the movie set and whoever loaded the gun. Now I know that some people think that it was a conspiracy. That someone purposefully mixed live rounds in with blanks in order to get Alec in trouble some way because of how much of an asshole he is. I very much doubt that's true but, anything's possible I guess. And I doubt that Alec himself brought live rounds onto the movie set and loaded the gun. If he was, he'd be criminally responsible. I highly doubt that he did. But since he's not only an actor, but a producer of the film as well, he may have some civil repercussions. But not criminal. I know how much people want that because of their hatred for him. But I don't see that happening. Time will tell though.

reply

[–] [deleted] 2 years ago

I don't totally disagree that whoever brought the live rounds on set are ultimately responsible. However, following the rules for gun safety could have prevented live rounds from ending up in the gun when they were starting to rehearse the scene. A lot of that falls on the armorer, but she was in over her head and had more to do than she could handle. Producers might have the most responsibility for what happened, cutting corners and not having qualified people to oversee the weapons. They created this situation on set where untrained, unqualified people were playing with the guns and handling them a lot, giving them to the actors without properly checking them.

I think you're right. There's going to be a huge lawsuit but no criminal prosecution. I was talking to someone who actually thought he was guilty of murder, and was putting manslaughter out there as a worst case scenario for Baldwin, but that's not happening. Baldwin the producer might have to write a very big check though. They skipped things like using protective screens and having someone properly trained check the weapons, but Baldwin the actor probably isn't responsible for that. Anyway, there's no way they could charge him with murder.

reply

[–] April-151-CT (10210) 2 years ago

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.latimes.com/entertainment-arts/business/story/2022-04-27/sheriffs-interviews-with-rust-armorer-hannah-gutierrez-reed%3f_amp=true

reply

[–] [deleted] 2 years ago

This doesn't say where she was at the moment of the shooting. I guess literally you could say she was "on set" but she wasn't there where they were filming, overseeign things, handing the gun to the actor and checking the gun like she was supposed to, which was my point.

Being somewhere in the area, maybe working on props, which was her other job, could be considered "on set" but that's semantics. Again, the point was that she wasn't there supervising the guns while they were shooting. Someone else who worked on the set just handed the gun to Baldwin without checking it. The whole production was pretty loose with the rules when it came to handling guns.

reply

[–] MickyMac (3172) 2 years ago

They're at fault for not having a gun expert on set or having Perspex protective screens for the film crew, taking shortcuts to save time and money.

Why they didn't use fake guns with gunfire added afterwards or one with electronically triggered muzzle flashes because some people feel there's something better about using real guns with blanks cause they want to see the fire and think it's better because it's real.

reply

[–] MickyMac (3172) 2 years ago

Unless he was gonna pull a prank on the cinematographer with a blank I don't know, mistaking a live round for a blank or a projectile down the barrel fired out by a blank?

reply

[–] AckbartheHutt (1370) a year ago

Should still be charged with something.

reply

[–] Otter (24464) 2 years ago

So now he's "reached a settlement" with the Hutchins family, but that only means that the family has agreed not to sue Baldwin or the other negligent producers for wrongful death.

https://www.reuters.com/world/us/baldwin-rust-producers-reach-settlement-with-slain-cinematographer-deadline-2022-10-05/

Whether criminal charges will be filed or not is up to the DA, but I don't think it's legal for anyone to "reach a settlement" in which a person accepts money to agree not to testify against someone who's committed a crime. So I hope that the family takes his money and testifies against the negligent sonofabitch in the murder trial.

reply

[–] JoWilli (19957) 2 years ago

interesting update, I think he should still do time for manslaughter. but he might pay his way of it.

reply

[–] Otter (24464) 2 years ago

I also think he should do time for manslaughter, he handled the gun irresponsibly and played a part in the onset negligence that resulted in real bullets being in the wrong place.

But I'm not the local DA, who has a small staff and a small budget, and dreads a high-profile case where the local boys will have to face a "dream team" of expensive lawyers, so I'd be surprised (but happy) if manslaughter charges were filed. It's likely that the worst punishment that Baldwin will face is losing most of his fortune to legal fees and paying off the Hutchins family.

reply

[–] TimeTunnel (4769) 2 years ago

Whether criminal charges will be filed or not is up to the DA, but I don't think it's legal for anyone to "reach a settlement" in which a person accepts money to agree not to testify against someone who's committed a crime.

Often done, often worked well.
What I don't understand in the whole case why Alec Baldwin is a "murderer".
Maybe the use of the gun was too careless.
But who put the live ammunition in the gun?!

reply

[–] April-151-CT (10210) 2 years ago

Most people that hate him are unable to grasp that. They can't see past the hate.

reply

[–] TimeTunnel (4769) 2 years ago

Alas, that explains a lot.
He isn't my idol either but facts should be considered.
Otherwise soon somebody hangs at the next oak again. ☻

reply

[–] Otter (24464) 2 years ago

The legal situation is complicated, there was both systemic negligence on the part of the producers and armorer that ended up with bullets in the wrong gun, and negligent gun handling on Baldwin's part. So it seems that Baldwin is twice liable, both for manslaugter for handling the gun unsafely, and as one of the producers who cut corners and made the set an unsafe place to work. The armorer is also in deep legal shit, and presumably doesn't have the money to pay off the Hutchins family the way Baldwin did, but it's not clear how much of the bullet misplacement was the armorer's fault, and how much was the fault of producers who made it impossible for the armorer to do a good job.

So Baldwin isn't a "murderer", he's just a killer! I''m not a lawyer, but I think his actions qualify as manslaughter under the law, and I hope to hell he's prosecuted. I'm sick of seeing the rich and/or famous get away with crimes.

reply

[–] TimeTunnel (4769) 2 years ago

Even don't see a "manslaughter" here.
Ok, he may be charged as a responsible producer (if he really was responsible) for ignoring safety rules. But that doesn't make him an evil "killer".
It was a tragic accident...as far as we know.
Again and again:
Who put the live ammunition in the gun?!

And sorry, your last sentence...
"I'm sick of seeing the rich and/or famous get away with crimes."
...sounds like social envy.

reply

[–] Otter (24464) 2 years ago

My being sick of seeing the rich/famous get away with crimes isn't envy, it's a core belief in justice and The Rule Of Law. A society in which the law is applied equally to everyone is not only a safer society, it's a society in which belief in the law and trust in the law is at its height. That's the society you want to live in, not a what we have now - a society where the rich get away with everything and the rest of us want to be rich so we can scoff at the law as well.

As for Baldwin, I never said he was evil, I said he was negligent. I have no idea what share of responsibility he bore for the safety issues on set, but I presume his signature is on some documents that would look horrible in court if he hadn't paid off the Hutchins family. As for the gun handling, everything I've read about general gun safety, and film industry safety standards, says that Baldwin was negligent. You never point a gun at anyone, even if you think it's not loaded, you never pull the trigger unless you're aiming at a safe target, etc. And legally, acting in disregard of basic safety makes a person liable for any damages done, like if you go driving on the wrong side of the highway and kill someone.

reply

[–] moviechatterer (15583) 2 years ago

" You never point a gun at anyone, even if you think it's not loaded"

How can you possibly make a movie following that rule?

reply

[–] Otter (24464) 2 years ago

I've been told that the film industry standard protocol for gun handling is "Only point guns at other humans when the cameras are rolling", and Baldwin pointed the gun and pilled the trigger during a rehearsal.

I have no reliable the source of this information is, but according to this unknown source there are all sorts of industry-wide standards for safe gun handling, none of which were followed on the set of "Rust". And a lot of that is down the producers, who didn't provide a gun safe and who gave the armorer a second job, in violation of the supposed industry standard.

reply

[–] Thaistickers (1500) 2 years ago

Nobody's been charged with anything yet, but speculation is that if anybody is charged it will be the two people who handled the gun before giving it to Baldwin. JoWilli, still trolling after all these years.

reply

[–] JoWilli (19957) 2 years ago

just spreading facts and my opinion. there will always be someone to disagree with you. some people think the glass is half full and some think it is half empty.

reply

[–] [deleted] 2 years ago

I thought you were going to mention something about OJ.

reply

[–] JoWilli (19957) 2 years ago

oh lol, well he is still looking for the "real" killer.

reply

[–] liscarkat (18367) 2 years ago

A death occurred because of stupidity, incompetence, and irresponsibility. There was no malice. No murder.