Rust armorer found guilty

[Tobra]

Was it ever established who brought real ammo on the set?

[MMARSH]

Originally Posted by Jeff Higgins

Guiterrez-Reed should have been able to leave those guns out, in the company of adult, responsible humans, without a worry in the world. They are not dogs. They are not children. The fact that they decided to break their own rules and mess with those guns while she was gone is on them, not her.

Do you really believe that, or can you just not stand being wrong.... She failed at the job she was hired to do, in multiple ways. Not sure why that's so hard to understand.

[Steve Carlton]

It is my understanding that:

- HG-R should have locked up the guns instead of leaving them on a cart
- HG-R loaded the live round into the pistol that fired
- HG-R brought live ammunition to the set

Prosecutors zeroed in on a box of rounds from the set.

When investigators arrived at the chaotic scene shortly after the shooting, on Oct. 21, 2021, Ms. Gutierrez-Reed showed a lieutenant from the Santa Fe County Sheriff’s Office a cart where she kept guns and ammunition and drew his attention to a box of ammunition where she said that she had retrieved the rounds she put in Mr. Baldwin’s revolver.

“So here’s the box that I got them out of,” Ms. Gutierrez-Reed, visibly shaken, told the lieutenant, Tim Benavidez, according to body-camera footage that was shown to the jury.

On the witness stand, Lieutenant Benavidez said that Ms. Gutierrez-Reed had shown him a rectangular white box labeled “45 LONG COLT DUMMIES.” Jurors were shown a photograph of the box that was taken in his patrol vehicle.

Investigators found a live round in that box. It was one of six known to be on the film set, which included the one that killed Ms. Hutchins; two that were discovered on top of the prop cart; one that was in a gun belt assigned to an actor and one in the gun belt assigned to Mr. Baldwin, who was playing a grizzled outlaw in the movie.

In a later police interview that was played for the jury, Ms. Gutierrez-Reed said that she had supplied two boxes of dummies to the “Rust” production that had been left over from another production she had worked on. She said that she had taken them from a bag, where they had been kept loose, and checked that they were dummies before putting them into boxes.

When Cpl. Alexandria Hancock, the lead investigator on the case, asked Ms. Gutierrez-Reed during that interview what those boxes looked like, Ms. Gutierrez-Reed showed her a photo on her phone.

“Does this look exactly like the box of dummies that Mr. Benavidez took from the prop cart on Oct. 21, 2021?” Kari T. Morrissey, the lead prosecutor, asked Corporal Hancock at trial, showing the jury the photo that Ms. Gutierrez-Reed had displayed.

“Yes, it looks exactly like it,” she replied.

The prosecution said another photo pointed to Ms. Gutierrez-Reed as the source of the live rounds.

One of the prosecution’s key pieces of evidence was an iPhone photo of Ms. Gutierrez-Reed in which she is holding a gun and has a tray of ammunition sitting on her lap. Sarah Zachry, the head of props on “Rust,” testified that she took the photo on Oct. 10 to ensure they were maintaining continuity on the production with regard to props.

The prosecution argued that at least two rounds visible in the tray on her lap, which have distinctive silver-colored primers, were live rounds. And they said that the fact that the photo was taken on Oct. 10 — two days before the production got more .45-caliber Long Colt dummy rounds from the film’s main supplier, Mr. Kenney — suggested that those live rounds had come from Ms. Gutierrez-Reed.

In her closing arguments, Ms. Morrissey compared the Styrofoam tray of rounds shown on Ms. Gutierrez-Reed’s lap with a photo of the Styrofoam tray of rounds that was taken out of the box of ammunition that Lieutenant Benavidez retrieved after the shooting. She argued that both photos showed the same tray, and pointed out that one of the rounds — one with a silver primer, which the F.B.I. later determined was a live round — was “in the exact same position” as in the earlier photo.

“Ladies and gentlemen, we call that circumstantial evidence,” she said, after leading the jury through a long series of photographs to make the case. “But that’s a mountain of circumstantial evidence.”

Ms. Gutierrez-Reed’s lead lawyer, Jason Bowles, told the jury that “you cannot tell a live round from a dummy by a picture.”

And Mr. Bowles said that jurors should not rely on the idea that the rounds found in those ammunition boxes were in the same containers they had been brought to the set in because “these rounds were loaded in and out of these boxes daily.” He said that “there’s reasonable doubt all over the place.”

Speaking outside the courthouse after the verdict on Wednesday, one of the jurors, Alberto Sanchez, said that the jurors had been convinced that Ms. Gutierrez-Reed had brought the live rounds to the set. “We think she did,” he said.

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/03/07/movies/rust-live-ammunition.html

[Jeff Higgins]

Originally Posted by MMARSH

Do you really believe that, or can you just not stand being wrong.... She failed at the job she was hired to do, in multiple ways. Not sure why that's so hard to understand.

Michael, I've been married for 38 years. I've grown used to being wrong.

So, are we to understand that with your defense of Halls' and Baldwin's actions, that you have no qualms about dicking around with something you were told to keep your hands off of?

I don't believe that for a minute. I think I know you better than that. If you are told to leave something alone, I bet you do just that. So why would you defend these two when their failure to follow such simple rules resulted in someone's death? Do you believe that if these two had followed those rules, no one would have gotten hurt? I do.

[Zeke]

Originally Posted by Jeff Higgins

One final thought on this. It seems that much of the "responsibility" assigned to Guiterrez-Reed is owing to the fact that she had left the guns out while she was away from the set. That somehow that compounds, or adds to her culpability.

Hmm... my wife and I share a home with two dogs, Ed and Tilly (known locally as "the planning committee"). You guys have all "met" them:

Like most folks, our household has rules. These two clowns are expected to obey the ones they understand, the ones targeted at their behavior.

Let's say I'm settling in on a Sunday afternoon to watch the F1 race or something. Thing One and Thing Two are either laying on the floor, or more likely the couch. I go to the kitchen to make myself a sandwich and, when I'm done, I return to the living room and place it on the coffee table. This does not go unnoticed...

Then I realize I should have poured myself a glass of milk, so I return to the kitchen, leaving my sandwich on the coffee table, in easy reach or Dumb and Dumber. And they never touch it. Because, well - rules. They know the rules.

Then maybe I realize I should hit the bathroom before I really settle in. I simply walk down the hall, leaving the sandwich and glass of milk on the coffee table. I have absolutely no worries that either of them would ever touch my sandwich. Because, again, they know the rules. Hell, I could go out and mow the lawn, leaving that sandwich right in front of them on the coffee table for hours. And they wouldn't touch it. They know the rules.

They both realize, of course, that when I return and before I finish that sandwich, they will both get a bite. But they know full well that as long as I'm gone, it's off limits.

I would have hoped that Halls and Baldwin are at least as smart as my dogs, and at least as well disciplined. They proved otherwise. Both are seasoned veterans. Both know the rules. Guiterrez-Reed should have been able to leave those guns out, in the company of adult, responsible humans, without a worry in the world. They are not dogs. They are not children. The fact that they decided to break their own rules and mess with those guns while she was gone is on them, not her.

Not buying that. Dogs can be trained better than humans (at least in my opinion) but that's not the point either. Rules are one thing, laws are another. HG-R was not convicted of breaking rules. She was convicted of violating the laws of AZ.

As I have been saying as much, we'll see when the "law" is applied to AB.

Speaking of laws, I expect as others, for this to be the impetus for legislation of law(s) WRT to the use of harmful devices in the production of entertainment. All entertainment.

[Jeff Higgins]

You missed the point entirely, Zeke. That point being that had everyone followed their own on-set rules, we would not be having this conversation. Yes, that includes her, but at the end of the day she was not involved in the specific incident that led to loss of life. She was not even there.

Notice how no one got hurt when she was on set?

[Zeke]

Originally Posted by Jeff Higgins

You missed the point entirely, Zeke. That point being that had everyone followed their own on-set rules, we would not be having this conversation. Yes, that includes her, but at the end of the day she was not involved in the specific incident that led to loss of life. She was not even there.

Notice how no one got hurt when she was on set?

I meant to say and failed to do so, that I can see your point. I don't agree 100%. So I didn't miss anything. You underestimate me.

[greglepore]

She didn't have to be "there". The loaded weapon was left out on a cart by the armorer.
There is evidence, heard by the jury, that the live rounds were in her possession (see Steve's post). And at the end of it all, if she simply had the common smarts to say " I f'd up, and I'm really sorry about that" this would all be over.
She couldn't, didn't and at the end of the day what the "system" does is assess whether you've already learned from the experience or not. She didn't. 18 months is a gift.

[Zeke]

Originally Posted by greglepore

She didn't have to be "there". The loaded weapon was left out on a cart by the armorer.
There is evidence, heard by the jury, that the live rounds were in her possession (see Steve's post). And at the end of it all, if she simply had the common smarts to say " I f'd up, and I'm really sorry about that" this would all be over.
She couldn't, didn't and at the end of the day what the "system" does is assess whether you've already learned from the experience or not. She didn't. 18 months is a gift.

The way you put it HG-R could have pleaded out and gotten slapped or get the sentence she got. Both are a gift, actually. A better scenario would have been plead for the 18 months or face 20 years to life.

Now, I don't necessarily believe that she deserves 20 years. But that should have been an option.

[MMARSH]

Originally Posted by Jeff Higgins

Michael, I've been married for 38 years. I've grown used to being wrong.

So, are we to understand that with your defense of Halls' and Baldwin's actions, that you have no qualms about dicking around with something you were told to keep your hands off of?

I don't believe that for a minute. I think I know you better than that. If you are told to leave something alone, I bet you do just that. So why would you defend these two when their failure to follow such simple rules resulted in someone's death? Do you believe that if these two had followed those rules, no one would have gotten hurt? I do.

Jeff, I'm not sure where you get I'm defending their actions, that said, I wouldn't say that rehearsing for an upcoming scene was exactly dicking around either. But to say it's completely not on her it's on them, come on......if she had done her job, no one would have gotten killed...There shouldn't have been live rounds anywhere near the set, the weapon should of been secured. Job one of the armorer. Halls and Baldwin, even though they violated the rules, would have zero expectation that live rounds were even a consideration. It is not the same environment as your gun club where the expectation is there are live rounds and hot guns present.

We are going in circles, gonna have to just disagree on this one. The one thing we all agree on is this was a horrible tragedy and should never have happened

[Zeke]

Originally Posted by MMARSH

Jeff, I'm not sure where you get I'm defending their actions, that said, I wouldn't say that rehearsing for an upcoming scene was exactly dicking around either. But to say it's completely not on her it's on them, come on......if she had done her job, no one would have gotten killed...There shouldn't have been live rounds anywhere near the set, the weapon should of been secured. Job one of the armorer. Halls and Baldwin, even though they violated the rules, would have zero expectation that live rounds were even a consideration. It is not the same environment as your gun club where the expectation is there are live rounds and hot guns present.

We are going in circles, gonna have to just disagree on this one. The one thing we all agree on is this was a horrible tragedy and should never have happened

That puts it to rest for me for the time being.

[Tervuren]

If I recall from earlier in the thread,

This is one of the reasons the crew had walked out of the job.
Baldwin wasn't providing lunch on site, and the hours worked and travel times were creating a dangerous sleep deprived condition on set.

Producer Aleck Baldwin was not keeping the contract concerning accommodations, hours, and meals. it requires a certain amount of downtime for rest, which as onsite meals and accommodations were not provided this personal downtime was not met.

There were onsite meals for a select top few.

Originally Posted by Zeke

Why this now? From what you say it wasn't lunchtime. She was AWOL. Any set I have been on (not many) everyone eats at once.

[Tervuren]

I would not consider these relevant for an actor.
Had any other actor on set pulled that trigger under the producer's orders I wouldn't consider the actor responsible.

Far more relevant would be these:

The producer had the highest level of responsibility on the site.
The producer chose for live functional weapons to be in use without the presence of the armorer.
The producer chose to bypass safety standards.

Originally Posted by Jeff Higgins

...She did not point that gun at anyone, Alec Baldwin did. She did not cock that hammer, Alec Baldwin did. She did not pull that trigger, Alec Baldwin did...

I would not consider it a travesty of justice until we see how Alex Baldwin's court case plays out.
He has the greater share of responsibility.
He operated behind the back of an underling.
The underling still failed at her duty.
Her case is about her own failings.

[Jeff Higgins]

Originally Posted by MMARSH

Jeff, I'm not sure where you get I'm defending their actions, that said, I wouldn't say that rehearsing for an upcoming scene was exactly dicking around either. But to say it's completely not on her it's on them, come on......if she had done her job, no one would have gotten killed...There shouldn't have been live rounds anywhere near the set, the weapon should of been secured. Job one of the armorer. Halls and Baldwin, even though they violated the rules, would have zero expectation that live rounds were even a consideration. It is not the same environment as your gun club where the expectation is there are live rounds and hot guns present.

We are going in circles, gonna have to just disagree on this one. The one thing we all agree on is this was a horrible tragedy and should never have happened

I couldn't agree more, Michael. We are just going around in circles at this point or, as Zeke said, "beating a dead horse".

I think we all do actually agree on most of this. How could we not? We are all reasonable, responsible adults, used to being held accountable for our actions. There is plenty of that - accountability - to go around. I think our only disagreement is with regard to the matter of degrees. Who is "most" responsible? More and more so, I am starting to think that doesn't even matter that much anymore.

Our opinions on that are shaped by our backgrounds and experiences. None of us are "right", none of us are "wrong". Shades of gray. You touch on the most important point - "this was a horrible tragedy and should never have happened". On that, we all agree. We should just leave it at that, out of respect for the deceased and her family. Agree to disagree, respectfully, and just drop it. Let's talk about something else. Like motorcycles or something.

[craigster59]

As a Property Master and someone who works extensively with Armorers and weapons on set, MMARSH is exactly on point.

The buck stopped with HG-R, she had complete authority over any and all firearms and ammunition, and had the ability to secure them and prohibit production from proceeding until she felt the set was safe.

But then there's the fact that SHE was responsible to procure the blank and dummy rounds for production and SHE allowed live rounds to be brought on set is inexcusable.

She had one job.

[Tervuren]

I would not work with either AB as a producer or GR as an armorer.

They have both shown they lack the toughness to admit to where things went wrong.
AB has lied, possibly so strongly to himself that he doesn't realize it.
Whatever success he may have as an actor didn't translate into being a good safe producer.
The filmcrew walk out was a "Stop!"
And things kept on anyway.

Originally Posted by Gene Kranz

"Spaceflight will never tolerate carelessness, incapacity, and neglect.
Somewhere, somehow, we screwed up. It could have been in design,
build, or test. Whatever it was, we should have caught it.
We were too gung-ho about the schedule and we locked out all of the
problems we saw each day in our work. Every element of the program
was in trouble and so were we. The simulators were not working,
Mission Control was behind in virtually every area, and the flight and
test procedures changed daily. Nothing we did had any shelf life. Not
one of us stood up and said, 'Dammit, stop!'
I don't know what Thompson's committee will find as the cause, but I
know what I find. We are the cause! We were not ready! We did not
do our job. We were rolling the dice, hoping that things would come
together by launch day, when in our hearts we knew it would take a
miracle. We were pushing the schedule and betting that the Cape
would slip before we did.
From this day forward, Flight Control will be known by two words:
'Tough' and 'Competent.' Tough means we are forever accountable for
what we do or what we fail to do. We will never again compromise our
responsibilities. Every time we walk into Mission Control we will know
what we stand for.
Competent means we will never take anything for granted. We will
never be found short in our knowledge and in our skills. Mission
Control will be perfect.
When you leave this meeting today you will go to your office and the
first thing you will do there is to write 'Tough and Competent' on your
blackboards. It will never be erased. Each day when you enter the
room these words will remind you of the price paid by Grissom,
White, and Chaffee. These words are the price of admission to the
ranks of Mission Control."

It's chilling to me that multiple guns on set had live ammo.
Some other actor could have been the one to pull the trigger.
If the film crew hadn't left the job, perhaps that is how it would have been.