First case involving Halyna Hutchins's death goes to trial .

[5whiskey]

I had a thought , maybe Hanna testifies against Baldwin to get a lesser sentence consideration

I assumed the plan all along was for Guitierrez to testify at Baldwins trial, which is why her trial was set first. While she could technically be called as a witness at Baldwins trial if he went first, she could literally say "5th amendment rights" to almost all questions while she is under indictment for the same event. It's likely her sentencing will be scheduled after Baldwins trial, and she may get credit for substantial assistance.

[JohnKSa]

I thought there was no way she would be convicted without a rock solid chain of custody for the gun from the time she loaded it until the time it was fired, with multiple witnesses ensuring it wasn't tampered with.

There was adequate evidence that she wasn't doing the job with ordinary care. The bottom line is that if she had taken ordinary care there's no way an actor would have ended up on set with a live round in the gun.

At least that's true absent any reasonable claim that someone intentionally brought that round and surreptitiously/deliberately loaded them into the gun to cause an incident.

Even then, if she had been on top of things, the issue would have almost certainly been caught before the gun was handed to the actor.

[44 AMP]

There was adequate evidence that she wasn't doing the job with ordinary care.

This is a key point most people (and especially those who write the click bait headlines) don't seem to get. It involves proper definitions and what some would call splitting hairs.

The jury didn't find her guilty of killing Hutchins. They found her guilty of negligence to the level that allowed the death to happen, and because there was an unintentional death involved, it met the legal standard for manslaughter.

The fact that there isn't a clear rock solid verifiable chain of custody accounting for every second between when Reed loaded it and Baldwin got it might be useful for creating doubt had she been directly charged with causing the death, but it works against her when the charge is negligence, because it is evidence she did not do her job properly.

[HiBC]

There I something I am curious about.

The work being done on that day was about creativity, not production. It was about matters not pre-defined by the script. Camera angles ,etc. .
So there was no cylinder loading sequence known. (Full wheel? Three blanks and two dummies?) So why would a preparatory loading be done?
For that matter,SAG rules would require BB shaking and loading on the set by the armorer while witnessed by all parties concerned. Then it would go in Baldwin's holster.
Supposedly it was done before lunch. Then locked up. Thats not OK.
The chain of custody to Baldwin's hand is a little murky. To my knowledge anyway.
IMO, once chain of custody is broken, the last handler is responsible.
The Actor should refuse any gun he did not witness the Armorer load.

The Actor should know and abide by at least that much of the SAG Code.

Who made the call to jump the steps? IMO, accepting the gun implies "I witnessed SAG Code being followed"

If not, THAT GUN IS LOADED . There is no slack for "Actors". Sure enough,the "unloaded guns" kill people.

One more question : No clip of film from that day was ever going to be viewed in a theatre .Attention to "Realism details" ???? Why?

What reason on Earth could there be to have any form of ammo component in the cylinder? Discussions about live ammo ,blanks and dummies become moot ,don't they?

Who called for anything in the cylinder?

Its just not that hard.

Between Baldwin, the Safety Director , and Hannah those questions need answers,

And Yes,Hannah should have said "No,we don't do it that way"

There are multiple workable safety systems. They cannot work if people do not follow the procedure,whatever it is.

And when someone is not following the safety procedure, the "Workplace Culture " needs to call them out.

I worked a career as a machinist. Walk into the shop without safety glasses,probably within 30 seconds someone will hand you a pair.

No one person can keep a jobsite safe. If thats the culture,that person is there to get thrown under the bus.

And yes,Hannah screwed up.

[stagpanther]

Well-written article in the New York Times written by a former SEAL officer on the Rust trial. Food for thought (I'm not finger-pointing).

[stagpanther]

I still think some kind of culpability for Baldwin is inescapable--but we'll see how it goes.

[rickyrick]

I just don’t understand, with today’s technology, why are functional firearms even allowed near a movie set?

Modern safety standards dictate that if a safer option exists, the safer option must be implemented regardless of cost to the company. If there’s an option to completely remove the hazard from the workplace, then that option must be selected.

In the USA a workplace is a workplace, no matter the industry.

For years now, I’d say a couple of decades at least, movies have had muzzle flash and smoke etc. added in post.

Basically people involved in the production of this movie took the easy way out and it cost a life. To get to the point of a fatality, lots of other safety failures lead up to the event. Blame cannot fall onto one person.

[44 AMP]

Stagpanther, I took the link to the NY Times article, got to read the first two lines then a popup required me to create an account and gave me no option to decline, other than exiting the site.

I just don’t understand, with today’s technology, why are functional firearms even allowed near a movie set?

A) because its cheaper
B) because movies have been using functional firearms as props as long as there have been movies. Done right, the risk is minimal. Done wrong, it can be lethal.

I still think some kind of culpability for Baldwin is inescapable--but we'll see how it goes.

There is no doubt in my mind that Baldwin is responsible for what he did. Whether or not those actions and inactions meets the legal standard to be convicted of certain crimes is for the jury to decide.

Yes, had the movie company decided not to allow functional firearms on location the shooting could not have happened the way it did. Regardless of which person made that decision, responsibility comes back to Baldwin, as "captain of the ship" for allowing the decision to stand.

Here's a point I just can't get past, yes the gun should not have been loaded, and yes, under SAG rules Baldwin wasn't required to check it, those rules weren't followed. And it was entirely Baldwin's choice to point the gun at a person and operate the mechanism. THAT makes him responsible for her death, in my view.

IF he had pointed it somewhere else, we'd be looking a news blurb about an accidental discharge on the set, maybe a camera or some other prop damaged or destroyed. But he wasn't pointing the gun at any of those things when it went off. He was aiming at a person.

Circumstances may not warrant a criminal conviction, that's not my call, but conviction or not, nothing changes what he did, and that a death and an injury resulted from what HE DID!

[Jim Watson]

We see one conviction, one plea bargain, and one Deal to walk, which takes care of the middle of the pack.
My layman's opinion of Baldwin is that he is culpable at both the front and the back of the case. He pulled the trigger, he cut corners on capabilities to observe industry standards.

[Ricklin]

THE guilty party. But will justice be served? I guess we will all have to stay tuned.

[MZ5]

Board dumped my post. I don't feel like re-typing it all. The last bit was this:

Hollywood's claims of needing realism don't hold water with me. They didn't need to kill Hutchins in order to make the gun-non-fight look 'real' (yes, I grasp that was not even part of the script; just Baldwin being a moron). I don't find old westerns less entertaining because they were only firing blanks off in a safe direction. I don't need (nor want!) to have an ACTUAL serial killer play the lead in some dumb movie. I don't need (nor want!) an ACTUAL new war between the Axis and the Allies in order to film Band of Brothers. It's ACTING for crying out loud!

[44 AMP]

Going by what I can find on the internet, the number of people shot and killed by "prop" guns on movie/tv sets is 3.

The earliest listed one is in 1984. The next one is in 1993. And the last one is the RUST shooting. Only one of those was during a scripted scene, the others were the result of the actors "screwing around".

There were no other listings, so, either the list didn't look any further back, or possibly, because there were no other previous deaths caused by guns on movie & tv sets recorded anywhere.

I think it quite likely no one was accidently shot and killed on movie sets prior to the one in 84 because, generally speaking, more people were familiar with firearms and took steps to be sure real guns used as props were as safe as possible.

The 1984 death was self inflicted. The actor intentionally shot himself in the head with a pistol loaded with blanks.

The 1994 death was the result of a prop gun, previously loaded with dummy rounds, having one of the bullet stuck in the gun, and later the gun was loaded with blanks (without being checked to ensure the barrel was clear) and then fired in a scene where the stuck bullet shot and killed Brandon Lee.

and then there is what happened on the RUST set...

[Metal god]

There were no other listings, so, either the list didn't look any further back, or possibly, because there were no other previous deaths caused by guns on movie & tv sets recorded anywhere.

Were the two others you listed deaths ? Maybe it's harder to find AD/ND that resulted in injury only . To be fair the number I'd like to see is the AD/ND on sets . If there is a lot of those, then maybe people need to stop using real guns . I mean we know of at least 3 ND on Rust . How many others over the years ?

[44 AMP]

TO be fair, AD/ND numbers aren't good justification for not using real guns. They ARE solid justification for not using un or under trained PEOPLE handling guns.

[Aguila Blanca]

Originally Posted by Metal god

Were the two others you listed deaths ?

Yes.

1984: Jon-Erik Hexum, on the set of CoverUp! This was the guy who shot himself in the head (intentionally) with a revolver loaded with blanks at point-blank range. Basically, he blew a chunk of his skull through his brain.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jon-Erik_Hexum

1993 was Brandon Lee. That one was as already described.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brandon_Lee

[Metal god]

Ok , my overall point is we only have three deaths . How many AD/ND resulting in injury ? Id bet that number is much bigger then 3 . Then there’s the point , how many are even reported. Cops aren’t being called every time theres a ND/AD like we had here with the two prior to the fatal shot . Im not trying to drum up an argument, only pointing out we don’t know what we don’t know .

What would be a good interview Is interviewing somebody like Sylvester Stallone or Arnold Schwarzenegger, etc. And see if they had any AD/ND On any of their movies because those movies had some of the most Firarms used and or fired that I’ve ever seen . I guess the other question would be , Would they even be honest about it?

[JohnKSa]

The 1984 death was self inflicted. The actor intentionally shot himself in the head with a pistol loaded with blanks.

Hexum supposedly was goofing around during a lull in filming, playing russian roulette with a blank without realizing how dangerous it was.

[Aguila Blanca]

Originally Posted by JohnKSa

Hexum supposedly was goofing around during a lull in filming, playing russian roulette with a blank without realizing how dangerous it was.

Correct.

I'm old enough that I was an adult at the time and I recall reading multiple articles about it. The show was about a CIA agent using being a male model as a cover. Hexum was the male model.

[44 AMP]

Just got done reading a pretty extensive Wiki list of accidents and deaths on movie sets from the 1910s to the 2020s.

specifically looking for deaths and injuries caused by guns. Only found 4.

One was in 1915 the movie was

The Captive (1915). During filming of a scene where soldiers were required to break down a locked door, the extras fired at the door using live ammunition to give the scene more realism. Director Cecil B. DeMille then ordered the extras to reload with blanks in order to film the next shot in which the door is broken down. One of the extras inadvertently left a live round in his rifle which discharged, shooting another extra, Charles Chandler, in the head, killing him instantly.

the other three have already been mentioned.

Literally hundreds of people from crew to stunt people and even stars have been killed on movie and tv sets, from accidents involving crashes (planes, helicopters, cars, trucks and motorcycle's), falls (from heights or off horses), drownings and even explosions, and many many more have been permanently injured from stunts or special effect gone wrong.

being shot with a loaded gun seems to be the least likely thing to happen.

[Metal god]

being shot with a loaded gun seems to be the least likely thing to happen.

Very interesting and goes against what I would have thought . If true that does seem to clearly indicate that SAG and whom ever before have done a pretty good job with there guide lines and any enforcement over the years .

[stagpanther]

Stagpanther, I took the link to the NY Times article, got to read the first two lines then a popup required me to create an account and gave me no option to decline, other than exiting the site.

Sometimes they'll let you see one article for free, most news services do that to bait you into subscribing.

[44 AMP]

If true that does seem to clearly indicate that SAG and whom ever before have done a pretty good job with there guide lines and any enforcement over the years .

Going by the available information, hundreds of thousands (if not millions) of people have worked making movies and TV shows over the past century +.

Thousands have been injured, hundreds have been killed, but only a tiny few from being shot. AND, the majority (3/4) on those have been in last 40 years or so.

Personally, I think this is because in the earlier days, real guns on movie sets were treated as real guns, and not harmless props. And most of that time was before there were SAG rules specifically about that.

"Trust, but verify" is not a new concept, and when used faithfully keeps us out of a lot of trouble. On the RUST set there was trust, too much, and misplaced, but until someone got shot they didn't know the trust was misplaced, because they failed the "verify" part, completely.

[DaleA]

Minor thread veer here:
A very interesting book on movie sets and stunts is:

"Stuntman!: My Car-Crashing, Plane-Jumping, Bone-Breaking, Death-Defying Hollywood Life" by Hal Needham.

He's got some fascinating stories about what goes on at some of the film sets.

IIRC he tells about a fifties cowboy and Indian TV series where the director wanted to film a soldier defending the fort getting shot with an arrow. The stunt guys thought about how to do this and decided to just shoot the actor with an arrow. They padded him up, got somebody that was pretty good with a bow and arrow and shot a weakly driven arrow and hoped they hit the padded portion of the guy's body.

He's also got some fun stuff about making some WWII movies and cop and robbers movies too.

P.S. Hal Needham is mainly responsible for the 'Smokey and the Bandit' movie but don't hold that against him.

[Metal god]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q--R5YBBphw
.
.
.
.

Spoiler below

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

Hanna was just sentenced to the maximum of 18 months in prison .