Is Alec Baldwin Going to Jail for the Death of Halyna Hutchins?
Vložit
- čas přidán 2. 11. 2021
- ⚖️ Do you need a great lawyer? I can help! legaleagle.link/eagleteam ⚖️
Shootings on set shouldn't happen. What happened here and who is going to pay for it?
🚀For a LIMITED TIME get CuriosityStream AND Nebula for 26% OFF! legaleagle.link/curiositystream
Welcome back to LegalEagle. The most avian legal analysis on the internets.
🚀 Watch my next video early & ad-free on Nebula! legaleagle.link/watchnebula
👔 Suits by Indochino! legaleagle.link/indochino
GOT A VIDEO IDEA? TELL ME!
▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀
Send me an email: devin@legaleagle.show
MY COURSES
▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀
Interested in LAW SCHOOL? Get my guide to law school! legaleagle.link/lawguide
Need help with COPYRIGHT? I built a course just for you! legaleagle.link/copyrightcourse
SOCIAL MEDIA & DISCUSSIONS
▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀
Twitter: legaleagle.link/twitter
Facebook: legaleagle.link/facebook
Tik Tok: legaleagle.link/tiktok
Instagram: legaleagle.link/instagram
Reddit: legaleagle.link/reddit
Podcast: legaleagle.link/podcast
OnlyFans legaleagle.link/onlyfans
Patreon legaleagle.link/patreon
BUSINESS INQUIRIES
▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀
Please email my agent & manager at legaleagle@standard.tv
LEGAL-ISH DISCLAIMER
▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀
Sorry, occupational hazard: This is not legal advice, nor can I give you legal advice. I AM NOT YOUR LAWYER. Sorry! Everything here is for informational purposes only and not for the purpose of providing legal advice. You should contact your attorney to obtain advice with respect to any particular issue or problem. Nothing here should be construed to form an attorney-client relationship. Also, some of the links in this post may be affiliate links, meaning, at no cost to you, I will earn a small commission if you click through and make a purchase. But if you click, it really helps me make more of these videos! All non-licensed clips used for fair use commentary, criticism, and educational purposes. See Hosseinzadeh v. Klein, 276 F.Supp.3d 34 (S.D.N.Y. 2017); Equals Three, LLC v. Jukin Media, Inc., 139 F. Supp. 3d 1094 (C.D. Cal. 2015).
Special thanks:
Stock video and imagery provided by Getty Images
Music provided by Epidemic Sound
Short links by pixelme.me (pxle.me/eagle)
This whole thing is a prompt reminder that regulations and safety protocols are written in blood. Don't take them for granted
Best comment.
I've had to remind people about that when it comes to OSHA Regulations
If you go back in time and check, it's crazy how many people died for example at recreation parks, before rules and regulations were put in place. Yes regulations are written in blood and with a severed finger as a pen....
@@MercenaryBlackWaterz the thing that gets me is there supposed to check and remove all bullets so there wasn't incase even a check. they pretty much gave the guy a loaded weapon..
Straight out of the Shake Hands With Danger video lol
Weird how there was a strike about lack of proper safety protocol, and then someone died and another was injured due to lack of safety protocol. Almost like the protocols are there for a reason.
And that the workers were right about their complaints.
Regulation exists for a reason.
I bet everyone at your job follows all protocols all the time always ;)
@@strunkr2 yeah and my job wasn't the one where someone was shot & died
well now you’re just making factual sense
I did a commercial last year at a firing range for an ear safety headsets brand. I remember the fire arms master being very strict about safety and storing the weapons as soon as the director had called cut. He tought me how to hold the gun properly and what not to do on set. He loaded all the blanks. He checked the guns. He only lets us take a couple of pictures with the props and he was there the whole time, making sure we were being safe with them. He was an absolute professional and pleasure to work with. Made the whole experience feel so safe.
@@OOL-UV2 Honestly it is so vital to know the chain of command and who was incharge of what, when handling guns (even guns with blanks). Before that shoot I was so anxious about holding a gun. As soon as I was briefed and told exactly what would happen, and who was incharge of the weapons it was such a relief. I could just concentrate on my job of acting, because it is not the actors responsibility to handle the weapons after the cameras stop rolling.
I have a bachelor's degree in theatre performance and have over 20 years experience as an actor and have done other things, including prop master. I will say this. There is usually a very strict prop rule that goes, "If it's not yours, don't touch it." The idea of anyone using prop guns to shoot at cans is a gross violation of that rule. And because these were kept in a locked safe, tells me that whomever was in charge of that safe should never ever work in the industry again. Fired for life.
Replace "should" with "will". Seriously, IATSE doesn't mess around with this sort of thing. Dude's almost certainly blacklisted. Probably that assistant director, too. And you can't really get around the union easily, except on small scale productions, since they're usually the intermediary for hiring stagehands and crew. They're both a union and a hiring agency, in effect.
Baldwin was one of the leads on production. So it’s safe to say he was a part of it.
Even in my middle school musical my teacher made us follow strict protocols to only touch our own props and to check in and out with prop master
Was the prop master for Rust a DEI hire?
I’d like to correct a statement from the video. Devin states that “cold gun” means a weapon contains blanks, not rounds that fire lead. This is incorrect. A “cold gun” is one that is not loaded at all. It would be any weapon that is incapable of firing a projectile, making a “bang”, or a muzzle flash. A weapon loaded with blanks is deemed a “hot weapon” on set.
When someone announces “hot weapon” it’s usually followed by an explanation of how many rounds we, as crew, should expect to hear fired, along with who will be firing them.
There is NEVER a reason to have a weapon on set with live rounds that throw lead.
this should be pinned.
He got it correct later on when he mentioned "a hot gun with blanks". But nice correction & explanation there for the mistake.👍 Good video still otherwise.
+
Thank you, and kind of you to explain...that makes more sense to me . This story is all over the place...it will be nice when we can hear about what really went on ...by theSheriff himself... ;)
Where is that definition written down and how do we know everybody understands that definition?
Focusing on Alec Baldwin distracts from the widespread and systemic stunt safety abuse in the industry, which this specific film crew was already complaining about, and which the IATSE union is striking over.
...of which Baldwin, as a producer, played a key role in upholding on this production specifically.
There are a great many people who need to be held accountable, but he is indeed one of them.
@@jordanthejq12 This is something I hadn't known before watching this video, but it is very important in my opinion. As the producer, I don't think it's unreasonable for him to be held responsible for the blatant disregard of safety protocals happening on set, which he could not have been unaware of.
@@jordanthejq12 “Producer” title doesn’t tell us anything since he’s a prominent actor. A lot of productions will give actors the producer title to boost the movie’s notoriety without actually giving them any actual power or responsibility. There were also like 6 producers and 4 executive producers, so there’s so many other people who could be in charge of hiring
@@jordanthejq12 what do you think producers do?
This is the first thing I've seen that focuses in on Alec, but I bet he's not really going to do that entirely.
Everything I've seen has been around what you mentioned, so I don't think its being ignored.
This case is baffling to me. I was a background extra in the movie 1917, and one of the things we were told on day one was that if a single bullet goes unaccounted for, production shuts down for the day until the bullet is found because that's a potential fatality just losse on set. Granted, we shot that film in the UK where gun laws are obviously vastly stricter than in the US, but still...
The issue here is that they were playing fast and loose with the guns and ammunition. I doubt they had any idea how many bullets were on set.
I highly doubt the validity of your story 😂 lying for attention and likes
@@emmiebell4194 I mean, believe what you want. I was a background extra in 1917, no matter what you doubt.
@@ratking1608 I think the confusion is that they think you mean the year 1917 not the movie...
It sounds like there was live rounds all over this set, they were even shooting rounds that morning or something? Pretty crazy they can be this reckless.
I have 60 year history of owning and shooting firearms. People familiar with firearms use the correct nomenclature. "Cartridge" and "bullet" are two different things. Someone familiar with firearms would never use the wrong word, just as a pilot would know that 'rudder" and "wing" are not the same thing. That clip of the armorer talking is scary. She used the wrong words. If she had to figure out how to make blanks, on her own, something was very wrong.
Just because somebody doesn't know the right terminology doesn't mean they don't know the actual practical skill. Now maybe this woman really doesnt know Jack shit about firearms but you can't definitively tell just by the words she uses. In example, My dad taught me dozens of knots and I never knew any of the names. Only recently working with another guy did I learn that the knots I used for decades had names like "truckers hitch" and "bowline" and such. I work in construction in some of the best framers I know don't know the terms "plumb in line" or "balloon framing" or "gusset".
@@autodidacticartisan except cartridge and bullet are very common words and even I, a gunless european, know the difference.
@@blindtherapper2470 it could be the case. Or maybe she was just nervous giving an interview and had a slip of the tongue.
@@autodidacticartisan that might make you an expert in the use of knots, but you're distinctly unqualified to communicate and supervise the correct use of knots in a team setting. You're only qualified to work independently.
She was quite obviously a novice with firearms. Let alone qualified to be in charge.
This is coming from someone that grew up in the Texas ranch culture where guns are treated as dangerous and necessary tools that one must understand and be competent with at a young age. First BB gun…maybe 7. First shotgun..10. Rifle at 13. Guns SCARE the HELL OUT OF ME, as they shouldn’t. My dad taught me this and then I learned more on my own.
There is just no way in hell that this armorer at such a young age could have acquired the proper skills to be in charge of so many people on a movie set. That expertise takes decades.
I love how this wasn’t only a legal review, but a full analysis of the incident, which is surprisingly difficult to find online.
This is most definitely the clearest explanation of the incident I've found so far. The news media really got a lot of things wrong in the initial reporting. Heartbreaking that Halayna lost her life when she had been trying to reconcile differences between producers and crew.
Alec Baldwin and everyone else involved keep releasing all these contradicting statements and accounts to the press. It’s hard to find a full analysis by design, none of the people responsible want the public to know what a shitshow the Rust set was.
Yeah BTW, the timeline and what each person said is extremely hard to find in one place.
It was a long analysis. Idk if id say its the best or most clear. He incorrectly described/detailed many of the important technical aspects.
Literally the most important step to a legal analysis.
Former theatre guy here:
Propmasters handle the props, not the actors. No surprise the propmasters are already pointing fingers at each other.
And yes, film production is usually that hectic, but most people don't throw safety out the window.
Genuine question
I've heard the term of "prop gun" be used when referring to 2 black pieces of wood glued together for an action scene and when referring to actual guns on movie sets
Shouldn't they have different protocols and names?
if alec wasnt flailing in his career he wouldn't need to cut corners...Hes the main name draw and the Producer...fault lies with Him.
@@airplanes_aren.t_real It just means it isn't a functional device. Like a prop knife has a blunt metal blade and is spring loaded to retract into the handle when you fake stab somebody.
@@Heirllionaire there are like 6 producers and 4 executive producers on this film as well as multiple production companies. In addition, actors are often given the producer title either to boost notoriety or to give them a cut of ticket sales instead of a salary and they have no other responsibilities or power. We have exactly zero evidence Baldwin was responsible for anything on set. He might have been, that’ll come out in the investigation, but from what we know now we do not have proof he was in charge of literally anything other than his own body in the movie
@@Heirllionaire producer only secures funding for a film. Line Producers and/or Production Managers actually make decisions regarding budget, hires, & practices.
"The plot follows a 13 year old boy who goes on the run with his grandpa after the boy is sentenced to hang for an accidental killing"
That's painfully ironic
When Jensen Ackles said that stuff in that clip, he was referring to the fact that he has a LOT of gun experience. Earlier in the video you said that a lot of actors did not have any gun experience, but that isn't true. Ackles worked on Supernatural for 15 years, and he either held or fired a gun in at least 80% of those 200+ episodes.
I was looking for this comment. Yes exactly! Thank you!
Yes! He waa responding to an alleged comment by Reed asking (in a perfectly professional way) if he's ever fired a gun before. And he was making a joke about it because like its been said be worked for 15 years on Supernatural where he handled a gun in almost every episode.
the only issue is that when I saw that she had asked him that question it raised me as odd because you would think you would do your research about actors before you go off with them to do training.@@boci122
I would say this is still relevant as his response was that kinda new guns and her training was just showing how a gun worked and telling them to fire it. Like the story even though clearly over exaggerated for humor is about he acted like he kinda knew and then blew the expectations as he is very experienced. But that level of training for someone who acts as they have moderate experience doesn’t seem like enough. Casually telling anyone how a gun works and telling them to fire blanks out in an area doesn’t seem safe and could show an overly relaxed culture to gun safety on set. So it could still be relevant in a case on this topic. And we won’t know for sure what happened unless the lasers of this case believe he is relevant enough to call for a formal testimony.
It's almost like most workers want to do a good job and when bosses don't give their workers the proper environment to do their jobs well things go wrong
Who could have predicted? Aside from all the union workers
Film productions are always hectic. Although not usually this wreckless.
@@samsonsoturian6013 to be fair all transformer movies had giant explosions (heck even ms bean had explosions) but there were no accidents because the people taking care of the explosives followed protocols
@@airplanes_aren.t_real Of course it was loaded with explosions, *IT'S A FLIPPIN BAY MOVIE!*
BTW, most movie explosions don't use explosives. They take a steel pipe, set it vertical like a mortar, load it with gunpowder, then put a ziplock bag of gasoline in it. When set off, it produces a big and fast fireball and sound can be added in post-production.
Welcome to American business. Do more with less has been every company’s motto for 20 years.
Can we get a legal analysis of the events that occurred during the Travis Scott concert? Especially interesting would be the liability aspect of it all
I don’t think he can because we don’t even know what exactly happened.
A load of people stormed the entrance and then people died.
@@starlord157 Same case with the Baldwin case, no?
It's pretty obvious that Travis Scott is responsible.
He knew people were dying left and right... But kept singing
@@ereder1476 it's actually deeper than 100% travis scotts fault, it doesnt shed proper blame on others
Any chance we can get a part 2 now that there are formal charges?
Yes please!!!
That's exactly what I'm wondering.
10/10 would appreciate
And a part three now that all the charges against Baldwin were dropped too. The story changes so fast Devin can't keep up lol.
@@Ocrilat And part 4 now that they are reinstated again lol
The 24-year-old armorer, Hannah Gutierrez Reed, is the daughter of Thell Reed, a long-time stuntman and armorer. This seems to raise the question of whether she was hired for this job because of who her father is or because of her experience and skill.
I see comments here and elsewhere of people citing whatever version of firearm safety rules they learned, and they make comments to the effect of, "You never point a gun at someone and then pull the trigger."
When filming movies, all kinds of inherently dangerous activities are engaged in. That's why there are experts who understand the dangers and work to minimize those dangers. Whether it's handling firearms, driving vehicles in a pursuit, hanging off the side of a building, or something else.
Those rules one learned when handling firearms no longer obtain. The rules involving firearms and filming are much more complicated.
That said, because of the inherent safety issues even when working with firearms loaded only with wads as the payload, many people are moving over to rubber guns / airsoft exclusively now.
Nepo babies at it again
horrifying to imagine that hutchins died due to someone else's nepotism
No longer obtain? What do you mean by that?
This is really insightful. The distinction is really important.
“Never trust an actor with a gun.”
-Abraham Lincoln
i get it lmao
@@arfansthename good for you
Hard for Lincoln to say that when his anecdote has not happened yet. Hard to say things when a bullet is in and out of your brain.
🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
“Internet quotes are often misattributed”
-Abraham Lincoln
I underwent British Army training as a teenager, where every round was accounted for. I cannot fathom how live rounds could ever have been on set in the first place. That is surely the fundamental question.
Welcome to America!
@@RowdyBoy82 I also had military training, we counted the discharged rounds to make sure that every live round that was handed out have been shot in training - no you can't have army issued bullets as souvenirs!
Correct. in my view it's a workplace and unless I'm doing police or other security or gun work, it need not be there. the armorer is a cupcake and they were having fun with ammo. getting actors familiar with the guns is good, but at a range off-site. safely. and no ammo comes back to the set. ask the insurance company if they knew about it. maybe..
@@RowdyBoy82 Actually I'm pretty sure it's illegal to have live ammo on a movie set, most actors arnt smart enough to use simple gun safety. It sounds to me like everyone on set should be changed with manslaughter. With all those cameras, where are all the security cameras?
@@RowdyBoy82 Yep welcome to where leftists like Baldwin get away with murder
Wow I’m a research analyst and I am astounded at the amount of research you had to do for just this one video. This must’ve taken you a long time!
I was thinking about Jon Erik-Hexum when you talked about Brandon Lee. I had a big crush on him when I was a very young girl and hearing about his death was heart-breaking... but, I also remember thinking that he couldn't have been terribly bright for doing that. I didn't know about bullet blanks at the time so my mother explained it to me when I asked how it could have happened.
IMHO, only someone who is certified to handle firearms should be cracking open the cylinder to check the rounds inside. On a set, that's the armorer. All these people want to criticize Alec for not checking the gun himself... that's not his job and, in an interview, he'd talked about having been trained early in his career to not mess with a firearm given him by the crew. Someone not certified in handling firearms who goes about manipulating the prop in ANY way could cause it to be a safety liability. Clooney can talk out his ass all he wants about what he supposedly does. The same can be said for all of those who chimed in that aren't part of the cinema industry. The armorer is the person responsible for maintaining and loading the firearms used on set, not any of the actors.
Seems to me that the two holding the most responsibility for this are the armorer and the assistant director.
This aged badly. Alec is a producer and should have known about gun safety...
@@curliefro being a producer doesn't mean you know about the safety rules. Often the producer isn't on set.
@@curliefro what a dumb comment. You have aged badly
While I agree with this, I feel the need to point out that every set I've been on that involved firearms had the Weapon Master show the weapon to the actor before every single take, show them whether or not there was round in the chamber and the magazine and involved them walking them through firearm safety and how to realistically and safely handle a weapon, even if they had prior experience doing so. They literally never took any chances, and this was all on non-union shows. Of course, this is in Canada, so it's possible we take guns more seriously up here.
@@Oberonjames yeah, a lot of people are responding with gun protocols that are in place in a normal environment where all ammo is likely live and you aren't pointing the firearm at anyone under any circumstances, but if the gun is being rendered safe by an expert so that it can be pointed at people it becomes a bad idea to let the actors cycle the weapon, etc. If I am having a gun pointed at me I want to know *for sure* that the only person who has cracked it open is the expert.
These tragedies are rarely due to a hole in protocol. They're almost always due to protocol being ignored. Hire professionals. Pay professional rates.
Also, be professional.
And following the rules set by the directors themselves. Do not point the gun at anyone. Baldwin broke his own rules
Didn't someone say that the shooting took place in New Mexico because those rules for using guns in filming in California were too strict and/or annoying ?
@@123werk
Have you seen a bond movie? They shoot the camera at the start of every one. In John Wick, Keanu is constantly pointing his gun at other actors and pretend shooting them.
@@heraldofoblivion499 what does that have to do with the fact the director himself set rules not to point the gun at anyone .besides if he didn't break his own rules he set and to go by what you said And aimed at the camera why is there no footage of the accident why pull the hammer back and pull the trigger.
"The plot is a boy on the run after being sentenced to hang for an accidental killing" Well it that isn't some morbid irony then Idk what is..
My thoughts exactly!!!
@@stevencoates3382 Why were your "thoughts exactly" wrong though? Nothing ironic there...
@@grabble7605 what ?
@@grabble7605 do you not know what irony is?
@@grabble7605 🤷♂️🤷♂️🤷♂️???
I feel especially bad for the family of Halyna Hutchins and Alec Baldwin. The psychological trauma one must endure from shooting someone without knowing the gun was loaded with actual bullets
Why every time a Ukrainian is killed, you are trying to equate victims with perpetrators? "Oh those who shoot Ukies must be really feeling sorry, they're the REAL victims" like STOP IT. Stop. Killing. Us. And defending the murderers.
I don't feel bad for Alec Baldwin. He was a producer on set and had control over wages, hours, and the competency of staff... He also pulled the trigger on that gun and then lied about it to shift blame.
This entire case is very occulty, what I wonder most is if the movie they were shooting will still be released and Alec be absolved of the killing of Halyna, not morally but legally.@@digitalcurrents
The armourer had no training, just grew up around guns, and in a podcast interview previously she had said she recognized blanks by the weight
Kinda glossed over the armorer. Like the AD she has a history of negligence on previous projects. Nic Cage reportedly yelled at her and walked off set for firing a prop gun so close to him it nearly blew out his eardrum
I thought that was the AD not the armorer.
And yet they were given work in this production ...
Makes you wonder how highly they valued safety in the first place
No, that's why Hall got fired from his last production. And it wasn't Nicolas Cage the gun was fired next to, it was a boom operator. But I have heard that the armorer put a gun with live rounds in the hands of a child on her previous set. Not sure if that's true or not, but pretty damning if it is. She should *not* be an armorer.
@@alfredlear4141 They get work like most people do in the industry; nepotism and cronyism.
@@sioward2753 I'm pretty sure that you are mixing up two separate reports. There was a report that the armorer was involved in an incident with Nick Cage which caused Cage to yell at her; I think I read it in NYT. This is separate and distinct from the other report(s) about the AD, such as the one that resulted in him getting fired.
Dave Hall was literally just fired from a film "Freedom’s Path" because he gave a hot gun to an actor and fired a live round right next to a crew member's face(luckily the gun was not pointed at the face and the scene even called for the gun to not be loaded). Hannah Gutierrez's last film, "The Old Way" had Nicholas Cage screaming at the AD for her to be fired because she was just shooting live guns randomly on set and almost blew out his ear drums. Cage stormed off set and then couldn't understand why the AD didn't fire Hannah, who was the AD? Dave Hall.
I'm going to take a guess that no respectable armorer wanted to work with Dave after he was fired so they hired someone with little experience who also happens to have a history of accidentally hurting people with guns on the only film she worked on before Rust.
Geez… So both cannot be trusted.
As per IMDb, there's no record of Halls being AD, or even working on "The Old Way" (2022). It does list Gutierrez-Reed as head armorer though.
It's always the same old song.
Frank Serpico, the famous NYPD whistleblower, was asked to testify against corrupt cops, and he refused because they weren't his real target. The brass who enabled this corruption was.
@@liamkiney4124 they never answered this. Did you ever find out?
@@Lucaz99 it might be hushed up reference. The only publicly available firing for Hall's was in regards to being fired from a film called 'Freedom's Path' in relation to a gun safety violation.
That prop guns were allowed to be used in live fire by crew was irresponsible, as was the presence of live ammo on set. Those were failures of both the armourer, and production team.
That the armourer was also the props master was wildly irresponsible; especially so with a crew that acted so cavalier with the prop weaponry, using them for skeet shooting off take.
Imo, there were no professionals on that set, only potential victims.
"I don't know what I'm doing" and "I figured in out on my own" is absolutely the last thing you want to be hearing from an armourer.
Latest 2023 news is Alec Baldwin Hit With MANSLAUGHTER Charge, THEY FOUND LIVE AMMO IN HIS BELT.
He had the live ammo on his person the whole time.
Would love to see a follow up on this now that the case has been updated.
I want to jump on one point here that Devin touched on at 6:54 (ish). He refers to the day of the "homicide," and he's absolutely correct. However, most people hear that word and think it means something else. In our modern world, "homicide" is often used interchangeably with "murder," but they are not synonymous. One is a legal term, the other is a scientific term. A homicide means one human died as a result of the actions of another human. It could be intentional, it could be accidental. In war, when two sides are facing off, those deaths are homicides. But they're not murders, because of the situation.
I just wanted to point that out before someone jumps on Devin for using the word "homicide" because they hear that and think it means the same as "murder."
I thought it was the other way around, thanks for the info
That caught my ear too, but made the wrong assumption. Thanks for the clarification.
Same with medical examiners, just because it's a homicide doesn't necessarily mean there was a murder, it just means the cause of death was due to another human.
Just like fatality and casualty. Casualty means injury, fatality means death, but you often hear/read 24 casualties, 13 wounded.
@@larimatolaganon4946 This! Civilians get so confused when they ask me what I do. I’m a causality coordinator at a causality station. Many think I push dead bodies around a morgue. It basically means I run the radios and assign staff and beds to the incoming injured. I think it is called Trauma Coordinator on the civi side.
The fact that there was live ammo on the set is a concern. When I first heard of this I was thinking “okay, something must have been lodged in the barrel and the dummy round forced it out Brandon Lee style”. It sounds more like the prop guns were unwisely being used for target practice and not enough time was taken to determine they were safe
I saw a few clips regarding guns on set, there is a clip form the corridor guys where they remake the gun sounds and effects from John Wick too. From what i gathered live ammo is used in certain instances too. Probably because it's a settled practice tested by time, the use of blanks and real guns is cheaper than dummy guns and cgi effects, or at least is faster to make the scenes. In that clip they said that in John Wick they chose cgi because many scenes are in close quarters and the blasts from blanks would had been dangerous. So i guess there are many reasons where all practices may have sense. But of course, you need professionals to handle all that and follow their lead regarding how much time you would need to spend as well as money. If you cheap out and also want it faster than it is possible to do it safely, then maybe do a different type of movie where those dangers do not exist.
I initially thought that the blank cartridges had a defect and the wad was expelled. As stated in the video, blanks are dangerous at close range.
Well when I say “concern” I’m basically saying “something that leans us away from freak accident to preventable careless accident”. I can tell you if I was a director shooting this film I wouldn’t be happy about having live ammunition anywhere on the set, let alone being put into the prop guns for any reason.
I think - to me - it’s beyond question that this accident was preventable, and the only question is if it was a *criminal* level of negligence, and who was responsible for making what decisions leading up to the accident.
Dude, I can't figure out a reason why the armorer doesn't make fresh barrels that bore only deep enough for the gas tube and leaves a closed barrel. The only thing that needs to happen is that gas is pushed back to chamber another round. Sure, it might be a little harder to clean after several rounds, but that's kind of the job. There's no reason to have guns capable of firing live rounds on a movie set. And it's not that hard to make a new barrel, so I don't see why this isn't basic safety protocols on set.
But I guess the armorer thing is probably not an organized team where the producer pays a team with their own armory to come in and provide safe weapons for. This might be one of those things we just have to regulate.
@@Hooper-DrivesTheBoat yeah, single action colts require them to be rotates one at a time.
When I worked at Skywalker Ranch(which was quite a while ago), they used .22 longs for everything if they actually needed a bullet to come out of a barrel(.45 auto, side loading levers, etc.).
Usually they would just use simulaters for the sound(electronically controlled firecrackers), and prop guns that looked the part, but basically were only capable of ejecting empty cartridges, if anything. Most of the time, they were little more than polymer casts.
For scenes that required a bullet going into a magazine, there was no powder inside nor primer where the pin hits the back. Nowadays CGI is actually much cheaper , and at least up there, they have a county Fire Dept. on the studio grounds. (Those guys say it's the best because it's the only fire dept. Where they schedule 80% of the fires before hand.)
Jesen: I know a little about guns...
Also Jensen: *Proceeds to channel demon hunting into his very being*
@LegalEagle My son was the head of the camera department who called the strike that morning that led to the walk off set, and subsequent replacement by another, inexperienced crew. He had repeatedly complained, by text and email to the production company regarding the sloppy and shoddy safety on set, Baldwin refusing to do extra weapon training and overall unprofessionalism. It was being produced on a shoestring budget, Hannah was doing two jobs: props and armourer. In fact, Rust tried to hire Hannah's father, a very experienced and well respected armourer in the business and he turned it down. This was her first BIG movie.
The crew that came out after the walkout....
Well, I'll just have to leave it there because of the current litigation, but, yeah, even though you say in a later video short it doesn't help her case by blaming it on the crew: I believe her. She didn't lock the gun case nor did she check and hand Baldwin the gun.
The truth will eventually come out.
Hannah Gutierrez was responsible for the bullets, and there's testimony that Hannah sent an email requesting to use the guns for target practice with live bullets on her time off. She was denied, but Sarah the prop master texted Seth who supplied the film bullets that Hannah was black out drunk & brought live bullets on set!
A terrible tragedy all around. That poor woman. I hope whatever the outcome is her family can find some closure
She wasn't really poor. Like, at all.
@@meow121.5 I don't think they were referring to her financial status
@@meow121.5 What an intelligent and sensible comment to make regarding someone's death. Very tasteful.
@@meow121.5 Wow did you even attempt to engage your brain before that comment
he probably misunderstood guys. I am sure he meant no disrespect. chill!
The audio clip of the armorer, who happens to be the daughter of a well known armorer, explaining that she basically learned how a revolver works while working as an armorer absolutely SCREAMS nepotism.
Wasn't even an armorer, just a propmaster. But yes, 100% nepotism and wasn't even recognized by IATSE (union that organizes film industry workers) as an armorer .
True but nepotism is a Hollywood problem in general
I would encourage you to listen to the "armorer's" recording again. She stumbles and stammers to even come up with any terminology never mind the correct terminology in describing a firearm and its function. This girl was an accident waiting to happen...and it did. She repeatedly uses the term "cylinder" incorrectly among other terms
@@hyfy-tr2jy I'm not even a huge gun nerd, but I noticed those improper uses of terminology. You could say she was struggling to dumb it down for the podcast, but a professional knows how to explain their job to people in the simplest layperson terms.
You'd think that the daughter of a famous armorer would have had some previous experience, but apparently not.
As a hobbyist, I knew more about guns at 21 than this "professional" did.
there is news he and the armourer will be charged with manslaughter. could you please do an updated version of this?
This is an outstanding discussion of the tragic event. I hadn't found your channel at the time of the event, but I'm glad I went back and watched this.
I'd imagine that it's perfectly reasonable to expect no live bullets on sets.
That’s why there is an investigation. Right now, no knows how a real functioning bullet round ended up on set.
@@LadyScaper from what I've heard, the Assistant Director and the armorer took the gun off set, loaded real bullets, shot beer cans, then took it back to set without unloading it
Exactly. How on earth are there reports of people (cast or crew) shooting tin cans / targets with LIVE ammo using a REAL gun that was going to ACTUALLY be used in the production? That seems absolutely bonkers, and is a HUGE red flag, if true. Aside from the expense and logistical hassle, I can't understand why you would ever use a real gun at all. There HAVE to be fake guns that have been built to not accept real ammo that look suitably like real/historic revolvers. If they really couldn't find / afford them, then the safety protocols have to be at the absolute highest level. At the very least least there should have been an total ban on live ammo on set. Why was it even there? If it was present (which it should not have been,) it should have been locked in the safe and never accessible during shooting (unfortunate pun not intended.) The production company, the AD, and the armorer are all probably on the hook to some varying degree for negligent homicide or involuntary manslaughter. I don't think any criminal charges are likely to be brought again Alec Baldwin personally (except possibly as a producer.) Even if criminal charges aren't filed, (which would be surprising as it sounds like there are solid grounds for them,) civil liability is going to be a huge issue for the production. There is a seeming pattern of negligence and recklessness that is going to be big trouble for some folks.
If the allegations that crew members were using the prop guns for target shooting in their free time then that would be shocking.
@@Strideo1 they arnt prop guns since they can fire live rounds. Most guns in movies are called “cold guns” since they are either manufactured or modified to not be able to fire live rounds.
I read something about the John Wick franchise using 100% computer effects to get the flash and bang in all gun fights.
The director of John Wick was Brandon Lee's stunt double.
John Wick Movies Suck.
To be fair I think Rust was going to Suck as well.
@@penknight8532 wow, I found one guys! Mr. "Everything sucks" right here. John Wick Movies Suck? Let me guess, you only watch Disney movies right? Or maybe rom coms.
@@penknight8532 the first moives pretty good. A lot of small details went into the fire arms
@@SlashRfnR One more edgy teenager...
@@SlashRfnR dude, hes just trolling or probably in intense seek of attention atm of the comment x'D
This whole scenario is sad and terrible, thank you for going through it as thoroughly as possible.
Great analysis Devin. I am also an attorney and at one point used to be an armorer on film sets. I think the element of "inherently dangerous" or "deadly weapon" will be challenged by the defense. - You have to ask an expert if a gun with a full load blank round is an "inherently dangerous" and deadly at more than 18 inches, as one crew member claimed, but it was probably further, Hutchin's lawyers made a video showing the Halnya Hutchins was at least 5 feet away. The only kind of "round" that can be dangerous on a movie set is a "blank round". A cardinal rule is that there are never live rounds on any movie sets, in fact, my cursory search of the internet shows the last known injury on a movie set in the United States was from a real live round was in 1915, 107 years ago. So, if the camera scene required the gun to be placed against someone's forehead, as in Jon-Erik Hexum, then yeah the actor could be charged with negligence for knowing a blank round was inherently dangerous and deadly ... but gas from a blank round dissipates very quickly and is not considered fatal at more than a foot or so... yes you can get a powder burn, or eye injury... but the mens rea for an actor of knowing that a gun is inherently dangerous for a blank round on a film set should be for an "inherently dangerous blank round discharge" not for a live bullet.
Not gonna lie. The plot of the movie and the situation at hand is perfect irony.
Fr lmaoo
What was the movie about?
@@jamesverner9132 a teen and his grandpa go on the run after the kid is sentenced to hang for an accidental killing
This is a Scary Coincidence
@@jamesverner9132 someone got accidentally shot in the story
A report has come out that, on the Nicholas Cage film that Reed worked on prior, multiple misfires and unannounced test shots occurred on set to the point that Cage got in her face, screamed at her for not practicing proper safety protocols and then stormed off set. It seems that Reed has a bad reputation as is, and I doubt she'll work ever again.
Cage is right to have yelled at her and let her have it. I certainly hope Hannah Guttierez-Reed never works again - she is a danger to every set she works on.
Yikes - that is one of the very, very few situations where I actually stand by a famous actor yelling at someone working behind the scenes.
@@Sahdirah I'm actually an actor myself and have worked on sets with not only gun work, but explosions and pyrotechnics which involved someone being set on fire and the amount of intense safety talks involved in simply holding a fake gun dwarf anything that happened on this set.
I mean, I hope she works again, just not in Hollywood. Maybe a receptionist, or a barista at Starbucks sounds like a good match to her skill set…
@@robertb6889 You think she was dangerous with a firearm? Wait till you should see her with an espresso machine.
I worked as an actor on Armed Response with Lee Van Clief. Used a shotgun in the scene which Lee and myself both checked before rehearsal and filming. Never trust ANYBODY when safety is a concern.
Would definitely like to see an update on this one with the whole charges being brought and all.
It certainly sounds like a LOT of negligence occurred on this set, as well as a totally unqualified armourer
Why were there even real rounds on set at all?
@@informitas0117 read about it, last i heard some idiots were using the gun to shot at bottles, you know, like they used to do it at the old west, the good ol days.
I wonder if she was underqualified or just not being listened to by her superiors. The common denominator among most versions of the story is that the production was being rushed and corners being cut. That sounds top-level to me. I guess we’ll find out eventually
I don't know if she was unqualified. Her education didn't come up in this. But surely she must have an education for the job, right?
@@Rapidashisaunicorn I would agree that ultimately it does fall on the higher ups and they certainly played a role in creating an unsafe environment. But I would add that irresponsible superiors often hire incompetent/unqualified workers if it'll save them money. So it's very likely that both things are true at the same time.
Really appreciate the call outs to IATSE and the struggles they're going through to fight for better conditions. It's been exhausting to see all these people, who work so hard to make the invisible art of film making happen, not get recognized for their work and get treated so poorly because of it. Thanks for making this video to help get the info out there and providing your views on the case.
IATSE is a farce. Their leadership is just there to collect dues, and generally couldn't care less about the well-being of actual members. I know states like CA have extremely good labor laws; members should file grievances with the labor department, but never seem to.
@@thomasbecker9676 a union is as strong as its membership; how many members actively participate in the union, aside from simply paying dues and leaving it to "the professionals" to speak and act on their behalf? A fighting union is made up of _active_ members, who go to the meetings to raise their concerns, and run & vote for an activist slate of officers if the current ones aren't doing what's needed. Bureaucrats can only get away with being useless if the membership lets them; and I've known several shop stewards who've tried their damndest to get their membership actively involved in changing things, only to be told "good luck".
@@dwc1964 Until they get rid of lameduck leadership, and actually want to work *with* the studio system instead of against it, it's a moot point. Part of the discussion needs to be getting rid of useless jobs that only still exist because they generate dues.
@@thomasbecker9676 Seems like you have all the answers. Perhaps you should consider applying to help and take a leadership position.
It really warms my heart to see more and more people not only acknowledge the workers in film production (and other industries) but sympathize with and advocate for them. It gives me hope.
Can you make an update regarding this video since charges have now been filed? Thanks. I enjoy your videos.
Awesome breakdown, especially since everything you said regarding criminal charges and the prosecution's reasoning a yr ago, has now come to light exactly how you said.
I’ve worked on multiple sets over the years and this really sounds like an absolute shit show even before the shooting. That many people don’t leave your production in droves if things are being done properly. Sets are dangerous places even without firearms and thats why regulations are there, hell I’ve been in situations where you couldn’t open a door or climb a ladder without someone there making sure it was safe. The fact there was live ammunition anywhere near that set is unbelievable! It’s definitely not the actors job to know if a gun had a live round in it, when an armorer hands me a weapon and says it’s safe I’m supposed to trust them because they are an expert in weapons and I’m not. Same if it’s the pyrotechnics guy handing me a flambeau, they’ll explain what to do to be safe with it and I trust and follow their advice. I can’t imagine the armorer wasn’t the one criminally negligent here, and potentially people higher up the chain who weren’t doing anything to correct all the safety violations and clearly cutting corners to save money.
I’m a med student who’s never been on a movie set and I can verify you’re right
And you NEVER have an armorer have another position. This armorer was also assistant prop master and the prop master walked out with the crew in the morning
@@archiedentone5950 That’s not entirely true. It IS true on a production like this, a Western with many actors portraying armed characters. Not so much on a production with a gun in a single scene-having a dedicated armorer is certainly an option, if the property master doesn’t have any experience or training with on-set firearms and practical effects. Many do have such training and experience. That said, many productions will hire an armorer for the day in such a situation, or only for those days they’re required.
I’d agree with you in the case of this production or any production that had a half dozen or more actors using firearms through various scenes. In fact, on some productions, the armorer has their own assistant or multiple assistants to help keep track of all weapon props, whether or not they’re functioning firearms.
Edit: Also, where did you hear that the property master quit with the others (from the camera department). I haven’t seen any mention of this. The only crew members that quit, according to every report that mentions it, were members of the camera department. I’ve only seen the property master mentioned once, in the L.A. Times chronology of events, and it said nothing about her quitting the show.
iv been in theater etc......I can absofuckinlutley agree with you. howerver, the actor that is being handed the wapon has an obligation to check it them selves just in case. he didnt do that. just like millitary, bro....trust BUT verify!.
Lol sure you’re an actor, because we all know how they are uncertified names and so many actors spend their time commenting on CZcams videos. They totally don’t have better things to do
It's so strange to me that people insist on calling it a prop gun.
If it takes bullets like a gun and shoots bullets like a gun then it's just a gun, regardless of what you're currently using it for.
That's what he's saying tho, Prop guns can't shoot bullets, only blanks. I may have misunderstood but that was what I got, and he said that revolvers can't be designed like that
@@bezerker2173 a prop gun is just a name for a firearm that is purchased for the purpose of on-set use. If it can fire a blank, it can fire a bullet.
Prop just means an object used on the set of a film or theater. It's not synonymous with fake.
Would you say it's weird for me to call the cell phones you see in movies "prop phones?" They're working phones too.
Thank you.
Such a thorough breakdown! Would love an update now that charges are filed
Love to see an update on this
Was anyone else horrified when they first heard the audio of Gutierrez Reed admitting she didn't know what she was doing with a gun?
She's the LEAD ARMORER on a film that heavily relies on firearms.
Yeah, “I kind of figured it out myself” is not what I’d want to hear from my armorer.
@@robertb6889 It seems like she was hired on the basis of being the daughter of Thell Reed. According to IMDB 'Rust' was her time being an armorer?
@@Sindrijo Ah good old fashioned nepotism strikes again
I was legitimately horrified when I listened to that audio clip. Maybe it was just nervousness from public speaking, but she did not sound 100% confident or even deeply knowledgeable in the handling of weapons and blank-firing weapons.
That's not what she said. She said "I don't know anything about it" in relation to loading blanks. And to be clear, in this context "loading blanks" does not mean the simple act of loading the round into a firearm, but instead of actually preparing the blank round itself - i.e. determining the proper powder load for a specific desired outcome, etc. That is an advanced skill that goes beyond the scope of normal firearms handling. Don't get me wrong - she definitely screwed up. As the armorer, that firearm should never have left her hands loaded with anything that she didn't put there herself. Even if the weapon was being used by crew for recreational shooting earlier (and if that can be proven, any crew involved should be blacklisted, and probably prosecuted), it was still her responsibility to clear the weapon, and then (if necessary) load it only with what was needed.
When I was a theatre major in college I took a props management class. My professor told us that if there was a gun prop, even if it was fake, we had to always treat it like a real loaded weapon - I.e. with extreme care. It confused me a little at the time - like if a gun was obviously fake why was all the caution necessary? Now I know there’s no such thing as too much caution when it comes to prop guns.
If you follow standard firearms safety precautions with all props, this kind of thing can't happen. If you follow all the extra steps required on movie sets, it should be impossible.
Also, they should have a 40 hour (or set amount) yearly, in person, class explaining all of the safety and rounds and what nots. All people expected to handle weapons should be required to attend and tracked and sent to insurance.
Then a refresher/8 hour class before shooting each movie with all on the set, to include those not expected to handle them.
From what I read that the police report reportedly said that the set's armorer received boxes of dummy rounds and blanks from three different sources and one box had dummy rounds mixed in with some live ammunition.
I've been in that same situation where lodging was a hour+ away from set, with 12 to 14 hour workdays. There was one week camera dept. & grips all just pitched a tent or slept in the trucks on fire blankets, and the AD and Producers were so pissed off because they were paying for lodging!
IATSE leadership says the strike is averted. I say this just confirms why we should strike anyway. They met none of our demands and copped out.
Agreed. I hope you get everything demanded. ✊
Maybe it's time to get rid of the leadership....
When I worked in Burbank, I refused to join, just so the bloodsuckers leading 44 could cash in.
@Pinnacle Weirdo Most all the members I know cared less about the hours and more about not getting their due from streaming services. They're extremely pissed-off, but not enough to leave the union.
I did my hours for G&E in Burbank with 44, but after I moved back to Arizona my local 415 was pretty much nullified by Right to Work and just the dirth of employment, so I stopped paying dues. I also worked with Haskell Wexler on a job aay back in the day, and bough one of his 12on12off hats. After a couple run ins with producers who literally laughed in my face for wearing it I was just like... yeah, great. How about instead of a strike, we riot?
*_Right now_* is when IATSE, and _all of its members_ and those who work in the industry and _should_ be members (but for "right-to-work" and other crap), need to *hit the industry hard* with your _full wish list_ of demands, made _publicly,_ and enlisting solidarity with SAG/AFTRA, the Writers' Guild and every other industry union (and all the tools of publicity they have access to), and a hard, fast, drop-dead *_industry-wide strike date_* as the "or else" if they don't give you what you need.
You will *never* have the kind of leverage against the entertainment industry than you do *right now.* *"Strike while the iron is hot"*
Loading real bullets on a prop gun to film with a crew that has an history of not having adequate safety protocols was a tragedy waiting to happen...
I'd say bringing live ammo to a film set - thereby risking a mixup - should be criminal.
I mean if there is anyplace you do not want live rounds lying about would be on a filmset where you know guns will be pointed at people and triggers pulled.
The I’ll lo
Please do a follow-up. What is the DA's justification for charging Baldwin with manslaughter?
Well, he did shot and killed her, it's up to a jury to determine if he's guilty or not. It's a criminal case after all.
@@maxpowwelthat makes no sense. If you’re in a movie set and you’re told to drive that car through that fake wall, don’t worry it’s empty safety room on the other side and someone just so happens to be standing on the other side, how is that your fault? That’s the fault of the safety team.
Love your videos. Was 1993 Brandon Lee’s death the almost 30 years that you were referring to or was there another incident?
Nope that was.... almost 30 years ago huh? lol
People need to stop focusing on Alec Baldwin because it's just covering up whoever is responsible for loading that gun with live rounds. Figuring out who brought those rounds and why they loaded the gun with those will be the key part of this investigation. If the story about some of the crew shooting beer cans with the gun turns out to be true, then that's a huge part of the problem there. Then shame on the armor for failing to check the guns. She sounded so unconfident - this is all just plain negligence. Who thought it would be a good idea to bring live rounds for a gun that is used on a movie set? It's NOT a shooting range - I'm so curious to know who was responsible for that.
Only reason this is really in the news other than the basic reporting of the tragedy is because of how political Alec Baldwin has been and there are those on the other side who are desperate to make him look bad. The other side started selling "guns don't kill people, Alec baldwin kills people" t-shirts. real classy.
If the armorer loaded the live rounds, then the armorer and Baldwin are to blame. No matter who hands you a gun, it is your responsibility to check to see if it is actually loaded or not.
@@johnbaker4246 Imo the only way I can see Baldwin at blame is if he were somehow involved (either directly or indirectly) in the poor working conditions and lack of safety protocols on set that caused concern from the staff.
@@johnbaker4246 Sadly that isn't how it works. Expecting an actor to check his guns is like expecting Vin Diesel to check every vehicle in FnF
@@johnbaker4246 So let me get this straight.
You believe that the person who knows absolutely nothing about firearm safety, should be the deciding factor if a firearm is safe or not?
The 4 basic rules of firearm safety exist for firearms intended to be used in real life, in real situations. Filming or rehearsing a movie, is not a real world situation. They were in a situation where the 4 basic rules of firearm safety *need* to be violated as part of the job. In those situations where the basic safety rules need to be violated, other measures need to be put into place. Hence why there are people who's sole responsibility is to make sure the firearms are safe to use under the conditions of the set.
Even if Alec Baldwin had checked the firearm before hand, do you think with no experience he would know how to operate a single action revolver, and be able to tell the difference between a real, functioning round and a dummy round?
Think of it like this, you are handed a firearm that under no circumstances would be loaded with real ammunition. Since you don't know how to verify for yourself, you have to go with their word and their expertise. With your knowledge and the setting around you, you believe it. The person using the firearm is *under the assumption* that the firearm is not dangerous which, under proper safety protocol, should be true. Taking this thought process even further, most indoor firing ranges that house automatic weapons for people to rent and use have a person *on standby* to load and unload the firearm for safety reasons. In fact, most ranges who have this person on standby would kick you out in a heartbeat if you tried to do it yourself. You would trust the person who's sole job it is to make sure the weapon is safe, because you have no other choice.
As much as I hate Alec Baldwin for being the way he is, I cannot in my right mind associate him at fault in this situation. The people who's job it was to make sure the firearm was not a danger to crew are at fault, full stop.
The armorer was inexperianced with basic revolver mechanisms.
The crew had been soda can plinking (target practice at soda cans) WITH THE GUNS SET TO BE FIRED THAT DAY.
This is the exact failure of safety checks that was supposed to be prevented in the regulation changes for film sets after the on set shooting death of Brandon Lee when filming The Crow.
That's completely insane behavior, I agree. It sounds to me like armorer should've been charged criminally for his incident in 2019, and DEFINITELY should have after this. A good prosecutor should have no problem building a case against him.
Prop guns aren't even supposed to be capable of being loaded with a live round. Blanks maybe. But there are all sorts of modifications done to prop guns to allegedly make them non lethal.
Armorers hired for film should be people who have many years of gun use/safety or range masters from a gun range or police/military armorers
@@CCHAWC717 that's why the fact that it's a revolver is important. Normal prop rounds look strange in the revolver because you can see the rounds. They require a specific prop round that looks almost identical to the real thing.
Haphazard barely does this situation justice.
An update of this case would be nice!
This seems to focus on him as an actor. He was also one of the producers who was running a project where people were quitting and much was made of unsafe sets.
I doubt he could be criminally liable in his capacity as producer.
A LOT of 'Producer' credits are in name only to pad actors resume. I don't know about in this case of coyrse
I am an IATSE member, I don't personally work in film or with guns, but from my conversations with people I know who do, the procedures for using firearms on set are extremely thorough and rigorous. If followed properly everybody on set will know the state of the weapon at all times. It should require multiple people to screw up in a big way in order for an event like this to happen. These procedures clearly were not followed on Rust.
One thing I do want to clarify is that a "cold" weapon is one that completely is empty, it has no charge in it. A "hot" weapon is loaded with blank charges. There should NEVER be a live round with a lead projectile on set under any circumstances. Armourers have been known to ask police officers to lock their weapons in their vehicles so they can be sure that there are no live rounds anywhere near set. That's how seriously they take the no live rounds on set rule, nobody is supposed to bring any kind of gun onto set other than the armourer and/or propmaster. Even the rubber "gun shaped objects" are treated as if they are dangerous.
It's stunning how much went wrong on this set. There were multiple negligent discharges that were not corrected, live ammo, shooting live ammo on set as target practice, and the failure of a professional armorer to check the chamber and Halls' and Baldwin's failure to check the chamber. The mass walk out of the IATSE crew sums it up as total disorganized and a mess. How many other corners did they cut?
How could this not be negligent homicide?
I'm sure it's more work and extra steps. But I'd be happy to follow every rule of protocol to a t. It only takes one fluke to kill someone and go to prison for a long time.
Unfortunately the armourer left the guns exposed unattended on a cart outside for 2 hours. That inexcusable. And she failed to check gun properly before and after that period.
So, we're talking about the "Swiss cheese" failure in safety procedures.
The problem with IATSE is that all the locals belong to Local 1 in NYC, which has for decades conspired with the producers to keep production hours long. In 2006, the Academy Award winning cinematographer, Haskell Wexler, made a documentary about sleep deprivation in Hollywood, Who Needs Sleep?. And how Local 1 would jump down the throat of Hollywood union leaders speaking up for reduced work hours…
Speaking as a stuntperson who has worked with firearms on set, real firearms live ammunition should under no circumstances be present on set. If I see a real, serial-stamped firearm, I’m not just walking off, I’m calling the police because someone has severely neglected their duty to the safety of the crew. It’s reckless endangerment, plain and simple. If absolutely necessary, we will use specially built or modified prop guns that are only capable of firing blanks. All other circumstances use something completely inert. Whoever allowed this to happen has severely damaged my industry.
Wouldn't the fact that several safety violations had already been committed, mean the blame should fall on Baldwin, the Director, armorer, and safety team? I mean they all seemed to know mistakes were being made.
If he knew and did nothing about it.
I am already a Curiosity Stream subscriber: How do I get access to Nebula? (I logged into Curiosity Stream but don't see a way.)
Interesting fact : in the UK, film sets are required by law to have 2 armourers at any time, so there would have been no situation in which an AP would ever handle a gun.
Hopefully something like this gets enacted here. What’s worse is the producers combined the job of armourer and assistant prop master which caused at one armourer candidate to refuse the job.
Putting in laws like the UK, stops the producers from cutting corners on such an important role.
Because ultimately, I think that is what caused this. Producers cutting corners.
@@LadyScaper Woof, I didn't know that. It really doesn't make the producers look good at all.
That's a law I can get behind. I think people are too obsessed with the fact that it was a gun. All the stuff coming out suggests that it was just general negligence. If it wasn't a gun, it could have been some other stunt.
@AeonReign Not what I meant. The focus is mostly on the fact that it's a gun when that's only secondary. Had it been a knife, they wouldn't be banning real knives. It's essentially blaming the gun and a common gun control view.
@AeonReign There's a petition to completely remove guns from sets. And I didn't say it was a gun control thing; I said it was the same mentality.
If you don't understand an argument, try asking instead of assuming. Kind of hard to listen when you're only hearing yourself.
I still cannot come to an understanding of why live rounds were ever anywhere near a movie set. They got there somehow, on purpose.
Or ignorance and negligence
I would love an update on this story since is interesting state law and pressures from the family and the way someone can be charged for murder or murder adjacent charges even as it wasn't purposeful/intnetional etc.
This included reminds me of how I drew up insulin as a nurse. It is such a dangerous drug to get the dosage wrong that you have to verify the dosage with another nurse. This has to be done with the needle still in the insulin vial after it has been drawn up. You then have to read the doctors order to the second nurse, then show them that is what type of insulin needs to be given-fast acting along acting, and the brand.and the parameters needed , such as a high blood sugar range, or given at a certain time of day. Then the needle can be taken out of the vial, and you and the verifying nurse both have to sign a nurses note outlining that all these steps have been taken. Even in a busy hospital floor I've seen nurses slow down to do insulin verification.
A weapon loaded with blanks is deemed a “hot weapon” on set. "Cold gun" has nothing capable of being fired.
Dad said I should never take anyone's word for it, not even his, if a firearm is loaded or not.
Baldwin should've pushed the cylinder our of the frame and checked the chambers before dropping that hogleg into his holster.
@@ninjabearpress2574 I know you are wanting to blame baldwin with this statement.
@@wjrasmussen666 because he shot a guy with a gun. Literally the first rule in gun safety is ALL guns are loaded. I don’t care if anyone gives me a gun and says it’s safe, I will check no matter what.
@@Thomas-wd1go that's because you were taught gun safety with the intent in mind that you at some point in your life, would be using a real gun, with real ammo. That doesn't exactly apply here, as baldwin would have had to remove the ammo to see if it was a live round, and he may not have known that since dummy rounds have the bullet, but not the primer/powder in it. That's why they have experts preparing the guns for the scene, and not the actor himself.
With a semi-auto it's easier, all you have to do is pull back on the slide a bit.
@@ExarchGaming Also it's better for everyone that only one person can declare a gun cold or otherwise. It would undermine the armorer's authority if every schmuck who thinks he knows gun handling protocol from reading on the net second guesses him. If not why even hire him in the first place.
My opinion prior to watching this video...
Since the actor who shot Brandon Lee with a prop gun was never charged, I see no reason why Alec would be charged with anything. Since he is apparently a producer he might be civilly liable in a wrongful death lawsuit.
It's his job and liability as producer for what happens on the set. So it's not Alec Baldwin the Actor being charged, it's Alec Baldwin the Producer.
@@lohphat there were like 10 total producers including executive producers, and multiple production companies. Actors are also often given the producer title for notoriety and to give them a cut of ticket sales without giving them any other power or responsibilities. We have no reason to believe Baldwin was in charge of anything right now.
@@lohphat I would agree to a point however I would say that when Alec Baldwin is in front of the camera is is then acting and has to think of that bit and would hope his co director has everything in hand. I mean yes if the directors are getting sued he is part of it and as a director he is in charge also
@@lohphat Nobody was criminally charged in relation to Brandon Lee's death. A civil suit was filed (against 14 corporations and individuals), but settled before it got to court.
@@f0rth3l0v30fchr15t I'm didn't mention Brandon Lee's situation because I'm unfamiliar with the details.
Can you do a follow up video of this case please?
We need an update!
This whole mess is just insane. Listening to that clip of Hannah made my eye twitch. I'm an Army vet and a lifelong hunter and firearms enthusiast. The idea that this firearm was handed to Baldwin without at least one expert checking it completely immediately before handing it to him is mindblowing. I get not letting actors also check the firearm as that creates chain of custody issues. The idea that the weapon wasn't actively in the possession of an expert armorer (not a kid with no idea what she was doing) from the moment it left the safe till the moment it was handed to the actor is insane to me. The idea that there wasn't a bulletproof glass shield between the actor and any crew that might be downrange is also insane to me. Guns aren't toys. They aren't props either. If it is capable of putting lead downrange, it needs to be handled with the same care a military armorer handles their weapons. If a military armorer had been that lax with firearms safety they'd be in the brig the moment an unintentional discharge happened, even if no one was injured.
But yeah, let's not have Baldwin share ANY responsibility as he should have checked the gun himself and had the training to check the gun, but like all liberal cunts he thinks he is superior to everyone.
@@codynoth4183 on set an armorer is supposed to be the one to check. It’s not just about who has the training. It’s about chain of custody. This isn’t a liberal thing. I’m a liberal. I’m also qualified to operate any class of firearm you hand me. It’s not about superiority. It’s about following on set procedure. According to what has been presented, Alec followed procedure.
@Stella Hoenheim before I rip you a new one, are you saying she was only hired to meet diversity quotas?
That is right!
Negligent discharges occur. I've been shot at due to a negligent discharge in the military and that person got busted in rank. He didn't spend time in the brig.
Unless Alec B. grabbed the gun lying around the studio, somebody gave him a loaded gun expecting him to shoot it. Even if the gun wasn't shot that someone should be punished. Negligence would be an understatement.
@Stella Hoenheim 🤣
Alec also acted negligent by not checking for himself. That is firearms 101 that 5 year olds learn and understand.
@@jenadams9904 Did you even watch this video? There are very good reasons that inspection of the gun should be left to the experts and *not* an actor. A film set is not like virtually any other real world scenario in which the options are binary (i.e. is the gun loaded or not). On set, a gun can be empty, loaded with dummy rounds, loaded with blanks, or some combination of dummy and blank rounds, depending on the requirements of the set up. It wasn't Baldwin's job to know how the gun was prepared -- he only responded to the announcement that it was "cold," meaning it should not have been able to fire (not even blanks).
@@nerdbot37 Right. And while yes, the expert(s) should not have let the gun have live rounds on set, again, leaving Alec out of the personal responsibility is ridiculous. I never once hinted that nobody else is at fault in the scenario, but that he did, in fact, also act in a negligent manner.
@@jenadams9904 you are completely missing the point. Actors ARE NOT firearms experts, the are actors. That is why EXPERTS are hired.
Let me ask you a hypothetical question.
A Nascar driver pulls into pit row, he gets gas and fresh tires. He leaves pit row and POW! A wheel flies off the car, sails into the stands and kills a spectator. Who is responsible? The driver, because he was in control of the vehicle or the pit crew member who installed the tire? One could argue that it is the drivers responsibility because WE ARE ALL responsible for our vehicles every time we put the key into the ignition. One could also argue that it is the responsibility of the pit crew member because they are the experts and it's the drivers job to drive the car, period.
So, in my scenario, who would you feel is to blame?
This was very interesting and helpful for my understanding of what might have happened.
We need an update on this!!
something that makes this situation messy is Rust is an independent film, meaning that not everyone on set was apart of a union. This means certain standards don't have to be met, costs come out of pocket, no health insurance, etc.
Honestly the entire thing sounds like them just being cheap and cutting corners. It is probably several things going wrong all at once, and while we don't know the specific cause, there seems to be a big picture problem with how they ran things.
20:44 Based on that podcast recording, I can say with full confidence that Hannah Reed is not qualified to be an armorer. What she described struggling with is the most basic function of a single action revolver. The cylinder only turns one way when the hammer is cocked and when you pull the trigger the hammer falls on the round that is in front of it. That she needed to "figure out how to make a specific blank go" is insane.
I was thinking that same thing... THIS lady is the Proffesional Armorer?!?! I mean holy shit. I used to teach NRA classes and the things she said while trailing off gave me chills...
My uncle teaches CC classes and goes over everything about guns and rifles to prepare for a CC license. The cylinder in a revolver as you mentioned turns one way and one way only. That seemed to be what she was struggling to or failed to understand. It's as though she believed the chamber would act at random. If she's an armorer, I'm the Queen.
@@misfitbrit1989 Correct.. Your majesty!
@Lucky
Her Dad.
Sure, but the podcast also included the part when she was talking about her newbie days, years ago. Listen to the entire podcast yourself. Actually, the video above here does mention when she was still inexperienced and learning from others, which that part is clear.
But anyways, the producer still hired her and that is Alec Baldwin. Same thing with the David Halls. There's actually supposed to be 2 more gun experts for film, which 1 is the security weapons officer and that position is not filled. Another is the pyrotechnician was unconscious when the shooting occured. As stated in the video, the film crew left in the morning and hours later, non-union workers were used as their replacements.
Based on the charges against Baldwin and the Armorer, are you going to do an update?
why would there be live ammunition on a set in the first place lol
As a comercial construction worker, the fact that there were no safety briefs after the accidental discharges is very concerning. Most sites I've been on we get a safety brief for someone sneezing the wrong way. Ok maybe not THAT much but it is a lot for the littlest of things.
Another thing that most people won't think about is the people who would of called out this behavior more than likely were not there because of the strike, were pressured to quit, or just straighted walked off set, like the morning of the shooting. This severely damaged the overall "safety culture", as safety managers would put it, of the site.
We had a safety meeting on how to exit a vehicle. I guess there is a set of standards for safely exiting a vehicle.. we had this initiated because an office worker twisted her back and was out for a day with a swollen back. Still, all of us techs had to do it. I believe if someone sneezes wrong it very well could result in a safety meeting.
But, but, but... MONEY!!!
This. The film industry would crumble if they had to upkeep the same standards as most commercial industries. This sort of stuff would not fly, at all.
@@Ailieorz but that's the thing, both fall under OSHA so should have similar practices, at least when it comes to safety standards. Construction companies that put people at risk are normally sued into the ground. Why this doesn't happen in the Flim industry idk. Maybe because there's only Hollywood?
@@jaredtandle2596 lol I could totally see one of our regional safety leads doing something like that.
It's wild how I've heard so many different things about this story (didn't pay too much attention to it tbh), but as it's explained, there's just a lot of common sense things that seem to have been neglected
Common sense isn’t common. I have known plenty of negligent people and they genuinely think nothing bad can happen.
@@LadyScaper that’s what happen the production crew is at fault. It also seem they neglected safe everywhere. Sad they want Alec take the fall go to jail, then being sued.
When accidents happen in a professional environment it's almost always because a great many rules and protocols are ignored. Arrogance and complacency become the norm.
Safety is terrifyingly easy to dismiss when under pressure to meet certain deadlines. We must never forget the consequences of taking shortcuts.
@@GrayCatbird1 ya but this case 24:33 the guy blames the prop master
the prop master is young said she was given 2 jobs at the same time
at the same time the guns where locked up but the real bullets where not
honestly the question for me is who took the real bullets? there is a gap just becuase the prop master controls the guns doesn't mean someone could have put in real bullets at one point not everyone obays all rules
How does an armorer even allow non-blanks on set?
•I have to point out he is not only an actor but also a producer, meaning he was responsible for controlling the ammunition on set.
•He also pointed the firearm at someone, (empty or not) when they weren’t even filming.
•he DID pull the trigger, that’s how a colt revolver works, pulling the hammer back half-way would only indent the primer, not activate it.
I can imagine multiple people could be charged with manslaughter or negligence, especially the armorer on set and the AD who declared it a cold gun beforehand.
I don’t agree that the A.D. has any more culpability for calling it a cold gun if he was told it was a cold gun by the armorer than the actor has for assuming it’s a cold gun and drawing and pulling the trigger because he was told it was cold by the A.D.
@@GOLDVIOLINbowofdeath the AD is the normally the person to check the gun immediately prior to handing directly to the actor. By safe protocols they are the 2nd line of defence after the armourer/PM.
When I listened to her on the Podcast talk about not knowing how to time the cylinder in a revolver. Makes me realize I knew more about guns when I was 13 than she did as an armorer. I cannot understand how she got this job
Nepotism.
Most people, whether actors, media, or are way less knowledgeable than a 13 year old who paid attention to his father who taught him about guns. Think of the things you know about a SSA, a five-shooter, a floating firing pin, a four click Colt, fan vs thumb, gunfighter associations, The Four Rules he made you memorize (but were all broken in this movie), etc. etc. Your father would be proud of you.
@David Cain
As a young Girl my Dad taught me alot more about guns than she knows!
'I were raised with guns.. I've never seen one go off unless the trigger were pulled...
And my Dad never locked 🔒 his guns up... I were taught too respect guns!!
He will get off because of who he is...Not because he didn't do it....
If you're a kiss azz Demon Rat you can get away with anything...Dem's just doesn't make mistakes... only Republicans does that,...
@@saffronwetter7944 I agree with you, but please, for the love of all that is holy, work on your grammar.
@@jerryocrow1 I don't think the four rules have a lot to do with what happened. It would be great if everyone received involved learned real firearm technique, but, like she said, she was denied time for that. In any case, it's not strictly necessary for people who shook blanks in a movie to know the proper firearm technique.
Like the video says, adding a step where someone who is not an expert checks the firearm would only add to confusion. There is already protocol that two experts check the gun, that should be enough. Just imagine if you do your job right as the armorer and an actor starts doubting you and attempting to do things his own way. You're just adding moving parts, and moving parts fail. If it had been followed this wouldn't have happened.
The best way to improve safety on a movie set is to send the one or more who are responsible. Think of the three dead actors/actresses in the last 50 years that come to mind and how sentencing the producer to ten years did to boost set safety.
I would need to see statistics for this to make sense. Is working on film set inherently more dangerous than other industries or are we just hyperfocussed on movie safety because it makes front page news worldwide, while the death of a delivery driver gets no airtime? One death in 30 years seems pretty safe to me, but yep i really dont know statistically how dangerous it is versus other occupations.
If the hammer on a revolver is pulled back, but not far enough to engage the sear, the hammer, if released, may strike the cartridge primer with enough force to fire the round. You do not necessarily have to pull the trigger to cause the weapon to fire.
Although the AD and the armorer have a history of recklessness, thus they're top suspects. All that really matters is finding out why there is even live rounds on set and who loaded the live rounds into the gun.
Seeing how the armorer is the one who loaded the gun (they are the only ones supposed to have access to them before shooting the scenes and having them double check) she is responsible for that question. so the only questions left is why there were live rounds, who brought them on set and why was the ammo not secured like the guns were.
Why did Alec point a gun at a film worker and pull the trigger?
Correct me if I’m wrong but Alec is also the producer and ultimately responsible for everything that happens on set.
@@SuperJohn12354 They were rehearsing. Watch the video.
@@SuperJohn12354 Stupid take
Remind anyone who thinks "regulations are bad" that the river in Cleveland used to CATCH FIRE before regulations on pollution. Regulations save lives.
The colloquialism "rules are written in blood" comes to mind.
True i have friends in the construction industry and they always complain about health n safety but those rules are there to protect the workers.Yes, i have stupid friends
@@ctdieselnut Red tape is red because it's soaked in blood. I've been shocked 3 times on set.
@@Gos1234567 I work in film, and every film set should be treated like a building site.
It was the Cuyahoga river,and it caught fire twice
Hannah Reed literally said "I don't know how to load blanks, I wasn't comfortable with it". That right there alone means she is inexperienced, she is not qualified, and she should NOT be handling firearms to any capacity, especially on film sets, when she is intrusted with the safety of others that are handling the weapons. It is HER JOB to know the ins and the outs of the weapons she is handling, and able to recognize a bad situation and intervene before anything bad happens.
Add Hannah Reed to the federal criminal charges for manslaughter.
Ty for explaining this so thoroughly to those of us who are not experts in these areas. As an actor in local projects, I am very interested in this story and it makes me very nervous, so I am anxious to hear what happens with it so I can educate myself, and be safer on set.
The four firearms safety rules(applies outside of firearms and includes blanks) :
Treat every weapon as if it was loaded
Never point a weapon at anything you do not intend to shoot
Keep your weapon on safe until you are ready to fire
Keep your finger off the trigger until you are ready to fire
Also known for memorization purposes as Treat Never Keep Keep. You sometimes see these broken by inexperienced actors, but occasionally set armorers will require these to be memorized before allowing access to associated props. As long as these rules are followed on set you will be perfectly safe. Alec Baldwin broke all 4 of these and some additional common sense(not having a basic understanding of how the automatic safety on his firearm worked), and that's usually what's required to have an accident. To set your mind at ease, there are police stations and military bases where there are armed guards 24/7 being paid minimum wage that can go still go decades between accidental discharge incidents. They simply follow these rules and like on set, breaking firearms safety rules is normally a ticket to losing those privileges.
@@Jason-fm4my I agree that he let his guard down. I don’t believe at all that he meant to harm anyone or ever thought anything bad would happen. I think, as human beings, we have all done something completely stupid at one time or another and then realized OMG that was careless and could’ve turned out bad. We have all been complacent here and there and hopefully nothing horrible happened. I think his big mistake happened when he trusted the person that told him it was cold. I get that. Maybe he was in a rush to start that scene etc. we all have the luxury of hindsight. In that moment, he didn’t. So it’s very easy for us to judge and say he shouldn’t have trusted that, etc. We are all human and accidents happen. So tragic and so sad. It’s even worse when they could’ve been prevented. I feel so bad for the victims (let’s remember there was also a man that was injured but survived that no one mentions) and their families and friends. I feel bad for everyone that was there that day and had to witness that. And I feel bad for Alec, who has to live with the fact that he accidentally took the life of another human being. You can hear the frantic and confused panic in his voice right when it all happened. So heartbreaking. Prayers for all.
@@TheRealJessicaValerio I guess I feel less generous, given that he's a very veteran actor who should know better and in general producers should have some level of responsibility for their productions. I don't feel particularly bad for someone running a bad set, just like I don't feel bad for sam bankman-fried for running a scam company, even if they were both harmed by the outcome. Everything else I agree with though.
According to the definitions in US Code Title 21 Chapter 13 Subchapter 1, the term "serious bodily injury" is a bodily injury that involves a substantial risk of death, protracted and obvious disfigurement or protracted loss or impairment of the function of a bodily member, organ, or mental faculty. Death or serious bodily injury constitutes a severe mishap on an operational risk management matrix and when the degree of risk becomes almost certain, as it was on set, it's producer is responsible for assessing the hazards and instituting controls, etc. via a formal ORM process at the start of shooting. Via an effort to hasten a one month shooting schedule, intentionally hiring a inexperienced 25 year old armorer who by her prior admonition just did what she was told, this producer is clearly circumventing general industry set regulation's safety practices. Also, under the federal Occupational Safety and Health Act (OSH Act), employers can be held liable for gun-related injuries or fatalities.
I can't imagine how traumatizing this is for everyone involved. I really feel for them.
I heard the lady actually owed Alec Baldwin money and he used the gun as a method of revengeb
@@flightofthebumblebee9529 you probably heard that from either a far-right twitter user or just a general idiot so I wouldn't trust that. The shooting was not planned by anyone
@@flightofthebumblebee9529 Ah, yes. Never too early to start the conspiracy theories that make fun of a real life tragedy. Nothing is ever an accident, it's always the result of someone being malicious.
@@Ryocniel Trump is telling his cult that Alec murdered her. I hope he sues him.
@@josgretf2800 I mean yeah Alec would be both morally and probably legally entitled to do that but it would also add more fuel to the fire. Not suing would be the better option from a PR perspective at least
I think it is absolutely insane they can hire someone to be both armorer and prop master at the same time. Sounds like the producers were cutting corners left and right. Negligent death civil suit seems like a near certainty at this point.
WHY TF was there live ammo on set?
Could we possibly get an update on this?