Exactly something that came up over and over again in the old threads. The story is that after filming, people were plinking with the gun. When you have a gun being used for 2 purposes, sometimes with blanks and sometimes with live ammo, it's a recipe for disaster. Et voila
I think this was an old gun in an unusual caliber, so not likely that anyone was carrying a gun that just happened to have the right caliber ammo. But maybe I'm wrong.

Sounds like a slam dunk and he's screwed. It'll be interesting to see what happens.

I would think Baldwin absolutely went against the advice of his (most-likely very expensive) counsel by talking. What that tells me is Baldwin doesn’t quite get the notion that he is not ‘special’, that the law applies to him just like everybody else (supposedly).

Maybe he gets it now. If he doesn’t take a plea, you can be sure he still doesn’t get it. With him, it’s likely he still doesn’t.

It's easy to Monday morning quarterback but why is a real gun used that is still functional . I get it that a real gun looks real . But in the case of this revolver why not modify the hammer so it physically can't reach the cartridge ? It would be an additional layer of safety in case all other safety protocols are breached .

As a total outside to the movie business I know several actors have been killed over the years with guns, even with just blanks loaded in them. From what Hugh and other movie professionals have mentioned, the rules are clear, never point a gun at anyone and pull the trigger on set or off.

I can guess that firing a blank make the move look more realistic with the flash and kickback of a real shot. Everyone like a realistic gun battle on screen.

Because having an extra non op gun costs money and the production was too cheap to go that route. There's an old saying in the prop world "If you only have one you have none". Actors are forever losing or breaking props and you better have a backup or three.

This all really falls on the armorer. She should have never allowed live rounds anywhere near the set, and when they tasked her with doing props along with armorer duties she should have locked up the guns and taken them off the set.

An armorer is hired to do one thing and one thing only. Supervise the actors in the safe use of firearms, make sure they are secured at all times and in proper working condition. None of these protocols were followed.

No one "carries" on a film set. It would be strictly forbidden and you are protected by off-duty cops in uniform as well as unarmed security everywhere. The cops are armed but there is no way they are letting their guns or bullets out of their hands.

On a low-budget film like this, they still had security. No one carries a personal gun on a set.

Yeah, I had forgotten about that since its been going on for so long. Seems like last month but it has been 16 months.

Here is link to Baldwin's attorney. Notice that he doesn't list 'Criminal' as one of his practice areas:

Antitrust & Competition
Appellate Practice
Art Litigation
Health Care Litigation
Entertainment & Media Litigation
Mergers & Acquisitions Litigation
Real Estate Litigation
Securities Litigation
Copyright Litigation
Intellectual Property Litigation

https://www.quinnemanuel.com/attorneys/nikas-luke/

Portions of interview with the 2 Santa Fe DA's


https://www.foxnews.com/video/6318930181112

sorry but embed didn't seem to work

You’ve never hung out with the transpo guys.

I agree with this. If anything, I think Baldwin's exposure is as a producer. Not so sure he's liable for the hiring of the armorer or assistant director. He may have had nothing to do with those hires. The incompetence of the armorer was known, but I don't know if the Rust producers were aware of it.

Prosecutors will have to overcome significant challenges, including not knowing how live rounds got on set and experts’ varying opinions about the on-set responsibilities of actors and crew members, said CNN senior legal analyst Elie Honig.

“Remember, this is a criminal case. You need all 12 jurors to find guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. So I’m not saying that there’s no chance here, but this is a really difficult case for the prosecution,” Honig said.

https://www.cnn.com/2023/01/20/us/alec-baldwin-charged-rust-shooting-friday/index.html

It's interesting that as part of the settlement, Hutchins' husband was to be a producer when the project resumed. That seems fishy.

If the revolver was out on a counter and the trailer was locked she is responsible for failing to secure the weapon. If it was in a gun safe in the locked trailer then she has a better case but still not a good one. No one should have access to that gun, trailer or gun safe.

I guess I'm still unclear on whether any of these protocols were followed on this set. They all make great good sense and, if followed, should keep everyone safe. But what if...

The armorer was not even on the set anymore when the live ammo was in use by whoever was doing the after work plinking? What if this was done behind the armorer's back, without her knowledge, after she had gone home?

Of course that would only be possible if the armorer was not the only one with either the key, or the combination to the safe. Some have said that Baldwin insisted upon having access to the safe. Does anyone know for sure if that is true or not? Did someone else have access?

I've also heard that the armorer was not even on the set yet at the time this incident occurred. That the armorer did not clear the gun and hand it to the assistant director, because she had not yet arrived on set. Anyone know for sure?

It's been reported that the assistant director Dave Halls was filling the role of "safety director" in addition to his other duties....and normally you'd have one person acting as "safety director", with no other duties.

And they did this to save money.

I don't know the usual protocol like Hugh and Craig, so maybe they can provide insight....

Halls also had a history.....

https://www.cnn.com/2021/10/24/entertainment/rust-shooting-assistant-director-halls-complaints/index.html

I believe that she was on set but not in the church when the impromptu rehearsal took place in which the tragedy occurred. She might have still been at lunch…not sure.

No one leaves a set for lunch but you probably already knew that.

Yeah, I thought about that after I wrote the post and I should have said that if anyone is carrying on a set, they keep it a secret.

From what I gathered she was not on set but the guns were unsecured on a prop cart (major no no). The Armorer should be the only one with access to the safe.

Step 1: I remove the firearms from the safe and inspect them.
Step 2: I inspect the dummy rounds, and the blanks required for the scenes, and then lock everything into my on set cart (lock being the key word here.)
Step 3: Once on set I put the dummy rounds into the required revolvers and then go to the first AD and show him or her that the weapon or weapons are safe. I do one added step that some old time prop masters told me never to do, I dry fire the revolver in front of the AD
Step 4: I show the camera crew, and any crew that have to be in the firearm area that it is safe, and again dry fire the revolver.
Step 5: I repeat the steps with the actor or actors. I make them pay attention to me, and when they ask me, "why are you showing me this revolver again? I just saw it five minutes ago." My answer is always the same, "because it was out of your sight, and I want you to know it is safe."
At no time is anybody but the Armourer, the Prop Master or their team, and the actor allowed to touch the firearm on set, that includes the Assistant Director. Nobody.
Also there is NEVER a live round on my set EVER.

Probably not going to be AB's trial attorney. AFAIK, AB hasn't been formally served yet. If that's the term. Maybe he has to go to NM to appear. If he doesn't, he certainly will be arrested.

See... this is what I was getting at. We've all formed some impressions, or made some assumptions (including myself). I can't say whether either one of you are right or wrong. I don't think this has ever been clarified, definitively, by someone who was there and in a position to know.

I also heard this was first thing in the morning, not around lunch time. But I have never seen anything from anyone who was there, who has said for sure. Just lots of "I've heard...".

Was she there or not? Had she been there, but had left? Was this first thing in the morning, before she had even arrived, leading to the conclusion that someone else had access to the safe? Was the plinking done only in the evenings, after she had left? Who supplied the ammo for that?

I find it "curious" that answers to these most basic questions remain unclear this long after all of this happened. Seems like in any other case with such a high degree of interest and attention, we have all of the nitty gritty details very clearly sorted by now. Not this one. That, in and of itself, is really odd.

Craigster, what’s the difference between the prop master and the Armourer?

Does the Armourer take care of real guns and the prop master takes care of fake guns? On the surface that doesn’t seem right as guns can get mixed up.

This link has a very short interview of a weapons safety expert for films:
https://www.foxnews.com/media/alec-baldwins-denials-puilling-trigger-rust-tra-load-crap-film-weapons-expert-says

He also shows how Alec could have pulled the trigger without doing it on purpose.
This video answers a lot of questions

Armorer takes care of all real guns, dummy rounds and blanks. They are kept separate, locked up and secured. They are FFL licensed and also sometimes work as prop masters but a good "gun guy" will always keep busy as an Armorer.

There are rubber "stunt guns" and Airsoft guns that you can use for action scenes and wide shots or to outfit background actors. These are also kept secured but available to the prop crew.

A prop master is responsible for anything an actor handles plus eyeglasses, wristwatches, wedding rings, cigarettes, food, etc. So you can imagine they have enough going on in a scene to where if firearms are involved that you need a dedicated Armorer. This film did not have that.

Having been "playing" with guns since about age 7, I find it pretty amazing that an uncomplicated single action revolver could go off by itself - no trigger pulled, while being pointed at an attractive co-worker. The courts will work this out.

Probably a dominance flirting thing going on.

Sorry, I feel Baldwin is culpable as well as others. Guns do not just go off with out someone pulling the trigger. I was always taught to treat every gun as loaded, even if the person who handed it to you cleared it in front of you. I always personally checked the weapon before doing anything with it. What really upset me about Baldwin was his immediate talk-show tour claiming he was not responsible for anything. Open you checkbook Baldwin....

It was immediately after lunch, around 1:30 pm, IIRC. HGR, the armorer, was still at lunch and did not know that they were doing an unscheduled rehearsal. Bummer if there is a paywall because all of the information you seek is in this article and the others linked within it, including video of AB right after it happened, being interviewed by detectives at the station and being informed that she died, etc..:

https://www.latimes.com/entertainment-arts/business/story/2023-01-19/alec-baldwin-charged-rust-movie-hannah-gutierrez-halls-involuntary-manslaughter

For sure. My dad was a criminal defense lawyer for most of his career and the biggest problem with representing big shot, egotistical clients was getting them to keep their mouths shut. It was never a problem with actual criminals who had been through the wringer before, always with someone like AB who is used to controlling situations and never had anyone tell them to STFU.

It's obvious that he was trying to control PR but he played the wrong card, big time. :(

This article has all of the videos from the scene and the video of AB, "in the box," giving his initial interview with Sheriff's investigators at the station and being informed that she died:

https://www.latimes.com/entertainment-arts/business/story/2022-04-25/rust-shooting-videos-alec-baldwin-hutchins-sheriff-investigation

According to this article - she wasn't at lunch....she was tending to other (prop) duties....

The attorney for "Rust" armorer Hannah Gutierrez, the daughter of long-time film industry armorer Thell Reed, released a statement Sunday in response to Baldwin's recent court filing, describing the rehearsal as "impromptu," and alleging that Gutierrez was not called inside the church to inspect the weapons before they were brought out. At the time, Gutierrez "had prop duties that she was forced to deal with," as production was "forcing her to take on more responsibilities for props," Jason Bowles, Gutierrez's attorney, said in the statement Sunday.

======

Really doesn't matter whether she was at lunch or attending to prop duties.

What Craig said about not accepting the word of someone other than the armorer that a gun is cold makes a lot of sense to me and an argument could be made that those involved with that rehearsal were not following proper safety protocol.

Thanks, Denis, that article lays it out very clearly. And no pay wall... probably because I'll never reach my limit of free reading of the L.A. Times...

It sounds like she was still away from the set, even if just eating lunch in a trailer located on site. Someone else must have retrieved the gun. It also sounds like it did not go through her hands before being handed to Baldwin.

I think Hannah Gutierrez-Reed is completely incompetent. Not sure if the producers of Rust knew anything about that before they hired her.

https://www.tmz.com/2021/10/27/nicolas-cage-yelled-hannah-gutierrez-reed-rust/

https://www.thedailybeast.com/alec-baldwin-film-rust-hired-inexperienced-armorer-hannah-gutierrez-reed-before-halyna-hutchins-shooting

My college roommate ended up a teamster transpo captain. You’d be amazed how many people in LA are carrying. When you have to do set up in Inglewood at 4am you want that security. It’s all below the line crew. The cops on set know. No one says anything.

Somehow nobody ever shot anybody.

See the short video in this link. It makes a lot of sense.
https://www.foxnews.com/media/alec-baldwins-denials-puilling-trigger-rust-tra-load-crap-film-weapons-expert-says

That said, I think he is responsible and should do time.

His statement of "I never pulled the trigger" is hurting him more than helping.

The average person knows that a trigger doesn't pull itself.

How much time? Just curious...

Though obviously protocols were violated and obvious neglegence was involved by probably a couple of individuals .... it still was an accidental shooting and death. In this day & age .... I doubt he does much, if any time.... her either.

An accidental shooting (death) at your gun range... would they do time? Same with vehicle deaths for the majority of them... just my .02...

depends on whether they apply a "firearms enhancement"-that's a mandatory 5 yr sentence in NM-normal IM is 18 months max. The DA may not apply the enhancement as this sort of accident is probably not what the mandatory was looking to prevent, policy wise.

Reminds me of Bill Clinton denial.

I didn't inhale when I pretended to smoke pot.

He meant to say exhale :D

I haven't seen reported that they know how the live rounds got on or near the set. The investigators have been looking at this but to no avail so far. Curious.

This to me is a significant aspect that needs clarification.

Who brought live rounds to a movie set, where shooting is involved in the script?

I've seen reporting that 25 live rounds were discovered. And not all in one place!