The Battles to Expect in the Hannah Gutierrez-Reed (Baldwin Film) Trial | LAWYER EXPLAINS
Vložit
- čas přidán 26. 04. 2024
- * EDIT: In the video I say that on February 22, 2024, the parties in NM v. Hannah Gutierrez-Reed (aka the first of two Rust Shooting Trials) will pick a jury, and that opening statements are set to begin the next day. However, I've since realized that jury selection is beginning on Wednesday, February 21st, and that opening statements are supposed to begin on February 22nd!!
FOR CONTEXT:
On October 21, 2021, the indie western film "Rust" was being produced on location in Santa Fe County, New Mexico. Actor/producer Alec Baldwin was rehearsing a cross-draw of a prop revolver. When he pulled the hammer back and released it, a live round left the revolver and passed through cinematographer Halyna Hutchins before landing in director Joel Souza. Souza was injured, but later recovered. Hutchins, on the other hand, died that day. Criminal charges were filed against Baldwin as well as against assistant director David Hall and armorer Hannah Gutierrez-Reed. Hall took a plea deal, and Baldwin's case is in the pretrial litigation process. This trial is the case against Hannah Gutierrez-Reed alone.
TIME STAMPS:
0:00 Introduction
0:39 Background
2:14 How Did the Live Rounds Get on Set?
3:06 The Charges
6:25 Pointing Fingers
6:58 The OSHA/OSHB Report
8:54 HGR's Use of Dr*gs & Alc*h*l
11:23 Will HGR Decide to Testify?
13:20 Prior Bad Act - The Motorcycle Incident
17:32 What Do YOU Think?
To Become a Member of Byte Club, you can pick between YT, Locals, or Patreon:
YT Members: / @legalbytesmedia
Locals: legalbytes.locals.com
Patreon: / legalbytes
--------------------
🚨 Our podcast:
Anchor: anchor.fm/legalbytes
Spotify: open.spotify.com/show/4i3YLop...
Apple Podcast: podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast...
Google Podcast: podcasts.google.com/feed/aHR0...
--------------------
🚨 We have a @LegalBytes Clips channel for clips from our live streams. Subscribe here: / @legalbytesclips4042
--------------------
Follow me here!
Twitter: / legalbytesmedia
Instagram: / legalbytesmedia
Facebook: / legalbytesmedia
--------------------
🫖 Dragon's Treasure Teas: Visit www.thedragonstreasure.com/?d... for 10% off some delicious teas and to support this channel!
--------------------
Merch: legal-bytes.creator-spring.com
--------------------
#RustShootingTrial #HannahGutierrezReed #HannahGutierrezReedTrial
![[FULL VIDEO] Police release bodycam footage of Monroe County District Attorney Sandra Doorley traffi](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/JTRMSfov7l0/mqdefault.jpg)
* EDIT: In the video I say that on February 22, 2024, the parties in NM v. Hannah Gutierrez-Reed (aka the first of two Rust Shooting Trials) will pick a jury, and that opening statements are set to begin the next day. However, I've since realized that jury selection is beginning on Wednesday, February 21st, and that opening statements are supposed to begin on February 22nd!!
Will you be watching with us??
Yes! I'll be watching your coverage!
@@bortwkr1482that's funny, you stole my words.
If you're live I'm watching.
It's not in dispute, the way the gun works mechanically it can't fire a bullet without physically having the trigger pulled the entire time or he cocked it and pulled the trigger, regardless Baldwin is a liar he pulled the trigger whether he admits it or not or remembers it or not. The state will easily prove that with an expert or 2.... So yea that's why some of us get pissed when you use that crap like. Some of us already know exactly what the experts will claim. You couldn't bang on the cocking handle with a hammer for hours it will never fire till the trigger is depressed, and wear and tear will also not make this possible. You all give gun design like som half idiot can design and make a gun, if people on average are more intelligent than 100 years ago, they had to design things like that to be rugged and idiot proof, and that's why everyone knows of colt revolvers today. They were idiot proof rugged to the point any intense wear or breakage of parts would make the gun just as safe as new. Give engineers credit, they were making handguns for 100's of years prior to the early 1900's it's not like they just started making guns a decade or 2 earlier....😁
@@scottbattaglia8595 I suspect that if he is put in the witness box he will claim he doesn't remember pulling the trigger but do agree that all of his interviews will be used too. Silence would have been his friend but he does love the spotlight.
Why were the producers not charged at all in this case? Specifically, the line producer. They were the ones who hired three inexperienced kids to supervise the guns, they were the ones who insisted that the gun training be cut down, and they were the ones who created the unsafe work environment. The OSHA report has a bunch of damming text messages and emails which show just how negligent they were in it.
There doesn't seem to be a law in this state for this that anyone has mentioned.
You forgot to mention the TOP producer was Alec Baldwin and the director was Baldwin. The top producer and the director are the absolute LEAD on set.
@@smurf902THIS! I don’t understand how people don’t ALSO fault Alex Baldwin.
@@smurf902 Neither of those things are true. The director was Joel Souza and there is no such thing as a top producer. Baldwin's producer credit was honourary which is quite common. For example, the latest season of True Detective was "produced" by Nic Pizzolato even though he didn't have anything to do with it and didn't even see it until it aired. "Rust" has 12 credited producers besides Baldwin. Either charge them all or only charge the ones who were actually hands on working on the film (line producer).
Good question! They were running a very unsafe set before HGR was even hired.
man that picture really screams “I'm a totally professional armourer that absolutely knows what she's doing” huh
Total girl boss
And her toting multiple weapons pointing all direction
I feel sorry for this Armorer. I believe that she was in way over her head on that movie set. She basically has no weaponry experience whosoever.
if you're a "gun expert" and you can't tell the VERY obvious difference between a real bullet and a dummy, you're not an expert.
Dummies literally look exactly the same as live rounds. You cannot tell them apart by looks, only by shaking them, because dummies are filled with bbs, and they rattle.
@@ConsciousExpressionDummy rounds are very different to live rounds. A live round is either a brass or copper case, with a bullet (projectile) whereas dummy rounds are aluminum with red painted flutes. A blank round looks like a live round, except it’s missing the projectile, so guess they could get hung up between dummy round, blank round, live round. I wonder if they are going confuse dummy round, blank round, live round, prop round.
@@peterking8586 I'm sorry but you're incorrect. Dummies are not blanks. The whole purpose is to look exactly like a live round, but have no propellant. These dummies had a projectile and primer, just no powder.
@@ConsciousExpression A dummy (drill round) are generally silver, with longitudinal depressions, which are colored red. The whole point of a dummy round is to make very distinct from a live or blank round.
A blank is a crimped case, without a projectile. So how am I wrong?
@@peterking8586Some dummies are ultra realistic, and these were the sort that also have a realistic dummy projectile.
I'm still surprised that they weren't using an angled mirror setup for the camera shots with a gun pointed at the camera. It's easy and cheap to do and if there is an accident with the gun going off while pointing at the mirror then only the mirror gets damaged. I thought ALL movie productions did that as matter of common sense.
Likely because there was never supposed to be live ammo on the set in the first place so it may have been more of a "why prepare for something that can't happen" mentality.
If we believe some of the early reports and I means rumors and remarks that came out, all rules were being thrown out the window in the rush to get this on film. I find it credible that Baldwin said 'so you want me to do itt like that?' In an aggressive manner and Balwin literally pointed the gun straight on at the cinematographer and the very expensive camera. This, if there had been no live ammunition on the set, and if there had been no live ammunition in that gun, would have been a rude gesture and rule breaking event but not a deadly act. I believe Baldwin made an angry gesture in that church building in order to shock persons. He was reportedly aggravated about being told how to do it in a leaked report and madevan angry pouty gesture that turned deadly. I believe there is some captured footage of that. Do i have proof? No , but I bet a decade or two later, it is revealed to have happened like I described above, as was described and reported early on.
She lied to police and after that had cocaine on her. That speaks to her character and the question does she have the needee for her job duties basic capacity for using good judgement.
All rules were thrown out the window, some say, in the rush to get this done more cheaply and because Balwin did not like being told what to do.
The angled mirror wasn’t used because it had lines of coke on it , to be used between takes by the armorer
Also several crew members walked off the set prior to that day. Why?
For me, this comes down to one thing. She was responsible for all the firearms on set. Why was he handed a live gun for rehearsing a scene? Why were all weapons on set not secure at all times?
exactly
wasn't she not even on set when this happened? Someone else handed Alex the gun without checking it, saying it was cold. While I do think a bit of the blame falls on this lady, on this specific day I don't think she gets even 10% of the blame
@@moonasha It's been reported that she handed the Assistant Director the gun to gave it to Alec Baldwin. It's her job to secure the weapons and make sure they're safe. Apparently the gun was not supposed to have ammo in it.
She should have been checking the guns and making sure they were secured away so that no one could mess with them. I heard that guns were used for target practice by crew during off hours and there were also 3 other accidental discharges. She was reckless with the safety standards on the firearms on set.
@@moonasha The gun came from her. And proper gun safety says a gun should never be loaded when the gun is locked away. So she never checked the gun to make sure it was clear. It was for a rehersal, so why did she hand the Assistant Director a loaded firearm.
@@moonasha Baldwin told initial investigation SHE handed him the gun, always. Hall was authorized to handle it after the scenes were shot as a hand-off back to the armourer. She admitted to loading the colt, having trouble loading one round in particular. She admitted to locking the gun up for lunch but leaving rounds out on her cart.
She admitted to retrieving the gun after lunch & not bothering to check it again "because it had already been done." Then she basically admits to being behind in her job & not having sorted blank from dummy rounds sufficiently. Finally she's not really able to differentiate live, dummy & blanks in any professional manner to police. Other than "I shake them to hear a rattle."
The damning OSHA report & the body cam police footage walking into handguns lying exposed on truck seats, etc. looks extremely sloppy on her part. And the whole "I had two jobs!" excuse is just lame. They were dealing with handguns & killed a beautiful, young woman with more talent in her little finger than both Hannah & Baldwin have in their entire families.
A 24 year old armorer with a drug habit? What could possibly go wrong?
Thank you so much for this video and for plans on covering it. There have been some things I was confused by watching the last pre trial hearing and you made it a million times more clear.
Greatly enjoy your clarity and flow of info...makes these intricacies much easier to grasp
Good breakdown! I'd be surprised if "yeah, I drank and did coke off set, but it didn't affect my work" flies.
I was shocked that was genuinely being pushed as an argument in the first place. If everyone who does drugs in their free time (incl alcohol) get charged with criminal negligence, shouldn't almost everyone on set be charged now?
I really needed this video as I was confused about the charges, so thank you!
Fascinating case for sure!! Love the coverage, Alytė! Keep the great content coming! 🫶🏻🫶🏻💝
That analysis was SO helpful! Thank you
You’re welcome, glad I could help!
man that photo with the revolvers has a) been getting a lot of use
b) must surely be regretted by ms reed
A fascinating and informative breakdown of an intriguing case. Thanks.
People get angry at you for using impartial language?? I'm sure more get mad if they think yoi're being too biased as well. So silly. I very much appreciate the way you frame things Alyte! I find it helpful to keep my prejudice in check before hearing the evidence and verdict. Thank you! 😊
Thank you! And I don’t worry about it too much haha, but people can find all kinds of reasons to get miffed. Even neutral language can sometimes do it 😂
Theres hundreds of thousands of people who watch these videos, of course there will always be a group that gets angry about something regardless of what it is
If you pull the hammer back on a cowboy style revolver, it locks in place. But, if you pull again and let go it WILL snap back into it's original set position, but the cylinder will not turn. The question is, if you do that, will the firing pin engage?
Also, there would have to be ammo present in the chamber for it to fire (if that pin engages that way), and it would have to be pre-loaded that way because the cylinder advances BEFORE it fires. If you "cock" the hammer back, the wheel doesn't move.
My experience is just a cowboy style 22LR I have. It's the same model, though it has the "door" for bullets (which in my eyes, makes it MORE unsafe) but all revolvers work on the same principle. Trigger pulll = hammer pulls back > cylinder advances > hammer slams back down > fired round. Manual hammer pull = hammer pulls back, then back down. No advance of cylinder.
So the questions I would ask are:
1. How was the gun loaded? Were all chambers loaded or all but the active one (the one that is currently aligned with the firing pin) or was it just select chambers or just one chamber?
2. If it was fully loaded was it NECESSARY to do this for the shot?
3. How do you tell a dummy round from a live round?
4. Why was it necessary to have live rounds on set?
5. How were the live rounds stored?
6. Was there a log on what was "checked out" for shoots?
7. Was there a "lock out tag out" system for guns when not in use, but still on set? (trigger guards?)
8. Per gun expert or test, can a revolver fire with just the hammer along WITHOUT pulling the trigger. What stops the firing pin if the hammer alone is snapped back down?
Some of these questions may have been answered already, but personally those are my questions.
This case to me seems to match something similar to an OHSA case where there is a death due to negligent policy to ensure employee safety. Such as failing to do a zero energy test before doing electric work. Or something as simple as ladder safety.
Honestly, I never thought Baldwin was the guilty person here in terms of being the holder of the weapon. But I DO believe he's responsible for the overall safety and operation of that production company as a whole.
Hannah will most certainly be thrown under the bus for this.
Please refer to videos by lawyer and arms expert Runkle of the Bailey.
1. fully loaded 6 supposedly dummy rounds - of which at least one was actually a live.
2. This was an unfilmed rehearsal so no. But this seems to have been an impromptu scene so Hannah says she wasn't aware of it
3. Shake it (again excellent video by Runkle where a rookie separates them blindfold). Dummies rattle, live rounds don't. In Hannah's 1st interview she says she also had dummies with slots in them (????)
4. It wasn't. Live rounds were banned from set. This is industry standard.
5. They weren't supposed to be there so there were no storage facilities for them. Guns were returned to the safe in the prop truck at lunch, but there do appear periods of time when the guns were unattended on the prop cart. Dummy and Blanks were also left on the prop cart and on the open prop truck at lunch (not in safe).
6/7. There were no logs/management systems for checking in/out guns or ammo
8. Per the FBI report (reviewed by Runkle) the gun was tested and functioned normally. The gun could not be fired without pressing the trigger. The gun had full lock, half lock and quarter lock stops for the hammer.
I disagree, Baldwin is guilty for his negligent handling of the weapon. He was not responsible for overall safety on set, that was the duty of other specific producers and Dave Halls, the AD. Hannah was also negligent for not detecting a live round when she loaded the gun.
@@nomadpurple6154 I don't know if it has any legal standing but protocol dictates that when handed a gun the receiver should check whether or not it's loaded.
@@geoffpoole483 On most film sets, if the reciever/actor is not able or willing to do the check, the designated expert/armorer does the check in full view of the reciever/actor. The Armorer should be with the guns AT ALL TIMES, yet on this set they decided to give the Armorer other jobs on top of minding the guns. Most of the misfires on set occured without Hannah being there. Showing that not only that people other than the Armorer had full access to the guns/ammo but many people on set had no friggin CLUE how to handle guns period.
He pulled the trigger
But the gun is supposed to appear loaded, the whole “check if guns loaded” is irrelevant when talking about a prop gun that’s supposedly loaded with inert dummies.
Unlawful drug users are federally barred from possessing firearms or ammunition. I wonder why the prosecutor doesn't use that against hannah
I think your buddy Ian Runkle did a video on the difference between live and dummy rounds.
Yes. Anyone could be taught in 5 minutes to easily distinguish them.
In this case of an unfilmed rehearsal of a nonfiring scene, there was no reason to have the gun loaded with any type of ammunition at all.
@@Mitch_Ryderbeing unfilmed sure, but in a revolver you are able to see the chambers. A loaded vs unloaded revolver is visually different when looking directly down barrel
a litteral child can tell the difference.
@@rabid123fox true, but this wasn’t being filmed so there was no need need for that. Even if they claim they required the ammo for a 100% realistic appearance, they should have used cold dummy rounds, not blanks, and obviously not live ammo. ….and it easy to distinguish the different types and it’s easy to check (I could teach anyone to do it in 5 minutes).
Great coverage!!
awesome info. thankyou
Awesome coverage and analysis thank you!
As far as im concerend, this is all on Hannah. She's the armorer. It's her sole job to prevent this. It's thier entire purpose. Keep the weapons safe.
I believe that this Armorer was in way over her head on that movie set. She was not qualified to even be an Armorer. She's is not an ex police officer or of a military background. I myself feel sorry for her. That job carries a lot of responsibility.
She was 100% out of her depth, but theres zero requirement for any qualification/certification for this job as far as i know. Plenty of LEO’s know SFA about firearms, just because they have one on their hip doesn’t ensure they know bugger all…
Low budget films are fine but never cheap out on guns & gun safety & handling..imo
Exactly! I think that every mistake in this case can be traced back to their efforts to save money.
@mitchryder5215 People quitting light & right. I come from a gun family & my son handled firearms, always with extreme supervision, at 5 yrs old, better than Baldwin did. Baldwin's cavalier attitude during the gun safety training was disgusting. He has had a lot of experience handling guns but that was not evident by his actions..imo
@@Always_Thinking Yes. I’ve seen a lot of comments from people who seem to have zero understanding of firearm safety protocols.
@@Mitch_Ryder he violated rule #1 on the chopping block, never point a gun at something you are not willing to destroy. Be it a watermelon or somebody's head.
Thank you for giving us the information regarding this case I will definitely watch your show you are brilliant 🥰🥰🥰🥰
Thank you for an objective presentation of the facts with correct terminology.
Fascinating analysis! I’m really glad I found this channel. I have a few brief points,
-You already acknowledged this but I agree with the defense that Hannah couldn’t have been responsible for safety because she had no power to stop production or mandate training. She’s young, inexperienced and most likely trying to have the producers’ job easier for her future in the industry.
-the state had a witness that gave her opinion that the dummy rounds were easy to tell apart from the live rounds visually. I’m sure this could easily be disputed and even demonstrated in court. On a dusty set will working quickly, I think it’s easy to see how they can be mistaken, which is on the manufacturer.
-my last point is that if they can prove that HGR was on illegal drugs or alcohol-case closed. It’s illegal, and unethical to carry a firearm or handle one while intoxicated even during leisure activities. On a professional level it’s worse, but having cocaine in your pocket is far from proof of intoxication.
I really tried to keep this brief. I’m really Interested in anyone’s thoughts on this.
The drug allegation is going to be the undoing of her defense. This is just sad.
I really feel sorry for this young lady. I believe that she was in way over her head on that movie set. She has absolutely no experience with weapons and ammunition. She's not a ex police officer or of a military background
@@gregorylyon1004 Yet, her father is a famous armory in Hollywood with a ton of experience and education.
@@gregorylyon1004So, you're incorrect.
But isn't the weapon master responsible to avoid any kind of tampering? It's still her job to make sure noone smuggled live rounds in there.
Great summary! Where does the buck stop? I cannot imagine she isn't found negligent to some extent.
If I was a jury member, that OSHA report would not buy Reed an ounce of sympathy from me. You are a grown up. You are in charge of the firearms. If the environment is unsafe, you take your guns and leave. All the OSHA report indicates is that there are more people that need to be charged, not that she gets off.
Yes! Well said!
Why is the assistant director not charged? Did he not hand Baldwin a loaded gun? Did he not assume the responsibilities of Gutierrez Reed by handing Baldwin the gun?
He was charged and took a plea deal back in March 2023, so no trial needed for him.
@@meganriley253 Thanks
@@meganriley253 He took a plea bargain because he was smart
I was gonna make things safe but i got high
I'd be getting high as well if I had to work for Alec Baldwin on set. LOL
Good job researching this case
How was the "who brought the live ammo?" evidence, hasn't already been used in prior court stuff?
Clear explanations … thanks 👍
Prosecution should be for both . Baldwin is just as liable through his own words.
As a local, I'm kind of holding my breath because the State doesn't always slam dunk things when it has a reasonably good look, if you get my drift. Still glad that this channel is covering the trial, it's fun to watch along!
Hmm, so there were actually Live rounds, not just duds? what the hell!!!
If I were an actor, I would never expect to be master of props. Alec being sought in any way is ridiculous, but whoever's actual job of the props and oversight are. What did they do in The Crow when the same thing happened to Brandon Lee? I recall it being a tragic accident, and nobody was blamed
Alec was also a producer, which makes it much more complex. The general treatment of ammo on set throughout has been widely super criticized, and Alec is not unfamiliar with firearms or film sets.
I agree, i think many people are head hunting Baldwin because they don’t like him (neither do i!) but personal feelings don’t negate facts. Actors are not qualified or responsible for determining what rounds are loaded into their prop guns. Sure some CHOOSE do have the firearms loaded and/or inspected in front of them, while thats great practice its not required or expected of them. It is however expected that the armourer doesn’t hand them a firearm loaded with live ammo…
Very informative. I appreciate the objective summary.
I feel like Baldwin should go first as the holder of the weapon. I also hope that OSHA report gets in.
As the armorer, she's responsible for all firearms safety on set. She's the one that's going to pay the highest price. Baldwin will pay a deep pockets fine, which he already has to the family but the armorer was supposed to keep the set safe. She failed to do that. That they were live firing at targets while on set, while filming was being done, was insane. Baldwin, for all his being a complete jerk in what happened, is actually protected by the fact he did have an armorer there. Now if she has no credentials, then it may fall back on Baldwin again, for firing qualified armorers and hiring dangerous hacks.
Baldwin is lying in my opinion. He pulled the trigger. He had to have pulled it. Guns don't fire on air. He's lying
Why would she lie about which guy was her boyfriend? That seems like a strange thing to lie about.
This is on the girl, what did Baldwin do wrong, he wasn't supposed to pull the trigger?
Baldwin is lying in my opinion
About what?
he pointed a gun at a living human being...rule 1 of gun safety is to never point a gun at anything you do not want to destroy
Movies often require things do be done that contradict the real world rules of gun safety. There’s protocols in place to allow for this, these protocols were obviously ignored on this set…
If the hammer hits, the trigger was pulled.
Will be there for trial when it starts after Jury has been picked.
You can’t let the character evidence in unless you’re Creighton Waters. Lol. Marijuana and alcohol are both legal substances in New Mexico. I think the Coke hand off wasn’t consciousness of guilt. She realized that the police would probably be searching her room and she didn’t want a drug charge. If this had happened in the state she lived in and was at her own home smoking weed and drinking, would that even come in as a factor? IDK but I’m really curious to find out. Jensen Ackles is one of my favorite actors. He was on Supernatural which was on the air for 15 years. He dealt with prop guns everyday. He said that he couldn’t believe the way gun safety was handled on this. He’s never seen anything like it. So that in and of itself really makes me interested in this case. I was so excited for that movie. BTW, do you know if Jensen is being called as a witness?
Although alcohol is legal there are laws governing its availability and use, for example drink driving. Alcohol and guns sounds like a recipe for disaster.
That's not at all what Jensen said LOL 🤔.. I literally just got done re watching his interview with police and he actually said he was impressed with Hannah and never saw her being "reckless" he said he believed she knew what she was talking about/doing and if she didn't that she did a great job of faking it...
Frankly, with the special effects available these days, there is simply no excuse to bring a working gun (or any sort of ammunition that can actually be fired) to the set.
From the photos I saw the brass is all starline *-------* and they only sell empty brass. So who loaded all the dummy and live ammo and got it mixed up????????
Thanks for your level-headed report of the events and focusing on the evidence. So many commenters want to convict the woman because they don’t like their hair or eyeliner or the way she dresses rather than on the facts of the event. So. Thanks.
I really feel sorry for this young woman. I believe that she was in way over her head on that movie set. She is not qualified to be an Armorer. And I believe that the producers hired her to save money. To producers it's all about saving money so they can pocket it for themselves. They threw this woman under the bus
A perfect storm of stupidity,happens once in a decade.
If a cokehead has coke, they are doing that coke, it's like the law of gravity, it's so dependable.
Why do studios use live ammunition? Why is a property department storing live ammo?
So if they were filming this then there is footage showing the trigger being pulled or not???
Baldwin is lying. He pulled that trigger
Both Baldwin and G-Reed are guilty IMO.
They went out “plinking” behind the set after shooting wrapped for the day multiple times. They used the prop guns, they brought live ammo so they could shoot cans with the prop guns and then planned to film the next day with these weapons.
This alone is horrifically negligent because it shows the Reed not only knew about live ammo and the prop guns mixing, but she effectively encouraged it. Her Allowing this one time was enough to set these wheels in motion for all of this.
"someone else brought live bullits to the set,.. good luck on that one.
He pulled the trigger. Without a doubt. Unless there was a mechanical failure, which is highly unlikely.
Hannah was a dominatrix for hire and drug addict for years. Her father attempted to get her out of that life by leading her down the path he took which was a movie armorer. Pretty big responsibility as for a job to say the least for a girl who hasn't done an honest days work in her life. Apparently she did give up the dominatrix thing in 2019, but continues down the drug and alcohol road.
She wasn't qualified to be an Armorer on a movie set. She's not an ex police officer or of a military background. She was in way over her head on that movie set
On a moral basis, not on a legal basis, if you are ever hired to do a job and are not allowed to do the job duties in a safe manner, if you are responsible for those duties and those duties are being interfered with, your correct course of action is 1 to verbally and in writing protest it and 2 to quit the job if this situation can not be remedied.
Ask Baldwin if: (1) his index finger was on the trigger guard, during the cross draw? (2) Does he apply increasing or similar pressure, on the trigger guard, during a cross draw? (3) Isn’t it most likely that Baldwin’s index finger was on the trigger and not the trigger guard, and that the weapon discharged a round?
Followed depp v heard with y,all hope to do same here! Hope the rest of the team are joining?
I recently saw that they had offered her a plea deal early on, a misdemeanor with no jail time, on the condition that she had to testify against the person who brought the live rounds. She told the police she didn't know who brought the live rounds, so she couldn't truthfully testify against the person they suspected. So, as punishment for this, they upgraded the charges against her, and are now trying to claim SHE brought the live rounds.
I really feel sorry for this young lady. She is being thrown under the bus by the prosecutor and the producers of the film. They are all trying to cover their asses. And I believe that Baldwin is lying about the whole incident. He had to have pulled the trigger.
If you pull the hammer back on that particular revolver and the hammer doesn't fully latch in the far back condition, then let the hammer return on its own, the gun will fire. It is not necessary to pull the trigger.
It seems unfair to expect just one of the Hollywood crew not to be a dope head.
One fact that is not in dispute is that Gutierrez-Reed didn't shoot anybody. She wasn't even present when the gun was discharged. Whatever her actions in the disputed facts, I think she is a designated scapegoat in the killing.
I believe that Baldwin and production threw this girl under the bus
Baldwin should not claim anything about what happened,he should have just said he didn’t think there was any live rounds.
I don't know where she was at the time of the shooting. It seems like she wasn't there. If so, and considering the lack of a safety culture on set, it would seem the case against her isn't that great. Based on my current knowledge of the case, if I were a juror, I probably couldn't convict her.
However, there are questions that I have not heard addressed. What were the extent of her responsibilities detailed in her contract with the production? If it were me, I would stipulate a comprehensive safety protocol in my contract that everyone must follow. Using bullet-proof barriers to protect the crew, and not pointing a gun directly at crew members in the first place, would have done a lot to prevent the tragedy.
Also, how did Baldwin get hold of the firearm, presumably from Gutierrez-Reed's inventory, seemingly without her knowledge and approval? The fact that this gun seems to have been floating around is the most damning part of the case, to me.
I have a lot of the same questions, and I hope we get answers. I will say that I think Covid was one contributing factor, as it contributed to their limiting how many people could be inside the building at once (why the armorer wasn’t considered an essential person for a scene like this would be a good follow-up question, though). Also, as to the safety protocol question, based on the fluid nature of her assigned role, I doubt her job was outlined on paper. I have briefly seen some texts admonishing her from neglecting the other non-armorer work in favor of her armorer work, which I think will be very beneficial to her case. So we’ll see how this all goes.
She was not on the church set. According to her statement she was at the props cart with Sarah Zachary when they heard the shot. Not sure how close to the church the props cart was.
Baldwin was handed the gun by Assistant Director Dave Halls who got a plea deal and admitted this. Dave was handed the gun by Hannah before she left the church. Hannah made allegations in her lawsuit (of Seth Kenney) that she told Dave to call her back onto set if Alec needed to gun, I've seen no confirmation of this claim, but would expect it to be repeated in trial.
@LegalBytesMedia That's interesting info. It seems that a vague job description could go against the defense, though. It might show that she wasn't very focused on safety from the start or that she wasn't even aware of the perfessional standard. Then again, I suppose that argument would likely need other evidence to reinforce the point.
@@nomadpurple6154 That seems bad. Reading between the lines, she's saying (to the guy she gave the gun), "Here's a gun that I obviously (retrospectively) haven't cleared, but don't do anything with it before calling me over to clear it." This is a bit incoherent. I think I'd have a tough time with this argument as a juror.
I believe that Baldwin and production threw Reed under the bus when this happened.
FABULOUS PRESENTATION AND EXPLANATION OF THE MANY FACETS OF THE COMPLEXITIES TO FACT-PROVING WITH THIS CASE!!! U'L NEVER GET A JOB AT FOX NEWS!!!
If in doubt, it's probably better for HGR not to testify. Any ever so innocent comment or explanation could be used against her, under unfavorable or even normal circumstances, and also inadvertent non-verbal cues could be used against her too. And it's the state that needs to prove guilt, and not for the defendant to prove innocence. It's often said you can't talk yourself out of a charge, and speaking the truth will unfortunately not necessarily set you free. Just see e.g. excellent video/speeches of Professor James Duane.
Having seen her two interviews with the police I agree, she definitely shouldn't testify, a half decent prosecutor will eat her for breakfast. And I'm told this one is pretty good in court.
@@nomadpurple6154 Sometimes the circumstances mean it's vital that the defendant testifies; the Rittenhouse trial is an example. However, this particular defendant should uphold her right to remain silent. Regardless of the verdict, few people or organisations are going to emerge from it in a good light.
You should cover do we know them legal batel
from soup to nuts? never heard that before
Wouldn’t negligence in regards to firearms rise to level of recklessness?
You still treat negligence and recklessness as two separate mental states. It's just that due to the inherently dangerous nature of the item involved, negligence when handling it can secure a conviction under New Mexico law.
Of course Alec Baldwin pulled the trigger. What he puts forward is quite literally physically not possible. Just a case of someone who never should have even held a gun in the first place.
Baldwin and production threw Reed under the bus
Experts have come forward to testify (obviously after this was uploaded) and the trigger must have been pulled for the gun to go off. He pulled the trigger.
when you show up for work with blue and yellow hair thats a red flag worthy of a drug test
The cops didn't even drug test this Armorer the day of the incident. They failed as well
I think she was responsible.
Are firearm professionals held to the same standard as other Professions? Typically they have a higher standard of care, as non-experts tend to place all their trust in professionals; lawyers, doctors, real estate agents, etc. In my industry she would need to have a huge folder of documented conversations that basically outline why she couldn't maintain a safe working environment, informing the Production, and possibly any other regulatory board (OSHA?). Just doing a dangerous job because they tell you to rush isn't a defense, it's a reason why a professional should fire their client.
She didn't have enough experience to join the Union. There doesn't seem to be a required professional qualification to be called an armourer in the movie industry.
I agree, as soon as her supervisors started pushing back on safety regulations she should’ve documented it and quit on the spot!
How many people know how to 'fan' a revolver or even know that you can do that?
How did a working revolver and live rounds get on a MOVIE set?
Baldwin didn't follow the rules of gun use even if it was a toy.
Armorer not drug tested after the accident? WTF it should have been automatic.
Alec Baldwin has killed more people than any of my guns.
I cringe every time I see his finger inside the trigger guard.
AB likely had a booger hook on the trigger when he let go of the hammer
Commenting for algorithm
Even if she didn't do drugs on set, she was definitely thinking about her drug habit while on set.
The major fact is that live ammo is one actually on set...
2. That live ammo is not secured in completely seperate location with requistion logs non existent.
government employees do not perform office paperwork... As decades inferior uncompetent unprofessional procedures have been breached fir a long time.
Whoevers decision it was to make her do 2 jobs and cutting corners are the ones that are responsible.
Mrs Bytes is purty
Sounds like the set was chaotic, she was under qualified and under paid. I feel bad for her but I think ultimately this was her literal job so I think this is going to be a tough case for the defense.
In my belief, just my belief with a history as an 11B Infantryman for 6.5 years with 2 combat deployments and a Gunsmithing certification, the safety of the entire production falls on the Armorer. She was supposed to be the GOD of firearms on that set. Nothing goes in or goes out without her approval, nothing leaves without being checked, nobody works unless properly trained, hand receipts are a must for what leaves, etc, etc, like she was supposed to be the definitive end all for the weapons, BUT I do think because Alec provided funding for the production and was underpaying in order to cut corners he ended up paying for terrible safety precautions which led to the horrible incident. I think they BOTH should go to jail for manslaughter with HEFTY fines and of course licenses being revoked. Again, that's my own personal belief, what actually happens will be NOTHING CLOSE to any of that lol.
This Armorer was not qualified to be hired for that Job. She has no military background or a police background
I think, Baldwin, was directed to aim the gun in the direction of the photographer to get the dramatic shot she wanted... he was handed a weapon, supposedly with blanks, which he would have NOT been able to tell the difference even if he looked.... so Baldwin should not be charged with anything... what if she had told him to pull the trigger to be sure she could get the shot... and yes, there might be a half cock before full cock lock... if his finger slipped off the hammer before it got locked back in the half cock or the full cock position, the hammer would have fallen... BANG... and only if the hammer was cocked all the way to full cock, could it be released ONLY by pulling the trigger... but Baldwin stated he was pulling it back slowly to see how it would look at different stages to the camera angle... so that leave HOW did the live ammo even get on set and who was it that checked and validated the blanks or ammo put into the gun or who had access to it between the prop room and giving it to Baldwin?
The only one to blame is the person who fired the pistol cause the directors death and that is Alec Baldwin and Alec Baldwin alone. Life in prison is a start for causing her death.
After they were shot she was like I’m in so much trouble I’m going to lose my job not she left in a helicopter I hope she is ok I’m praying for her I need to go see her
But I fear we'll never find out how and why the live rounds - fraudulently marked and boxed as if dummies - got on set. The most important question for me, neglected by prosecution and FBI.
6:58 is all you need to know. Prosecutors trying to hide relevant evidence from the jury because their aim is conviction, not justice.
Alec Baldwin, self-proclaimed gun expert, was passed a gun by David Halls (at the time recently fired from another film when a gun went off and injured someone(!!!!!!)), failed to check it, aimed it at someone and pulled the trigger. All this acting to the camera for his little Netflix special is just embarrassing.
Why's Alec adopting a pseudo Irish accent here?
I’m not a gun person, so this question could be very dumb… lol. But why doesn’t Hollywood use fake guns? I thought they had actual prop guns. And if they’re concerned about making fake replicas or not being fully real, why aren’t the insides hollowed out so they’re bare and unusable?
I know one was supposed to have blanks in it, but why do they even need blanks with the full power of a real gun? They’re going to add in sound effects later and they’re going to add in special effects. I’ve never understood why real, fully functional guns are used in settings where you don’t want them to fully function.
My prediction: they’re going to blame Trump
Her last name is not Reed.
...soup to.. nuts?