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

[Aguila Blanca]

Originally Posted by JohnKSa

There are no "shooters" on set.

There was a shooter on the set of Rust.

[Metal god]

Day 10

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=3CErYUe85X8

Here is Branca arguing Hanna is not guilty. Interestingly enough, it appears the opposite of what most of us are talking about now . I remember him talking about this when the case first started but I think he has changed his mind on this defense, but it is an interesting argument .
https://m.youtube.com/shorts/G2j5aaiMhgs

[stagpanther]

I hate to say it--but that was hilarious how many times the expert pointed the gun at people, including the judge.

[JohnKSa]

Even if the person she left in charge was her boss, who was a direct employee of the company that supplied most of the firearms and ammunition? And the directive to NOT be present originated from her boss's boss?

1. If the person she left in charge was competent to do her job then it wouldn't be negligence. One would think that person would then be the one being prosecuted and not her.
2. Is a person breaking the law if their management told them to do it? If l were in that position, I would want, at the least, for there to be some official record of my objection to the order.

There was a shooter on the set of Rust.

There was an actor who was handed a loaded gun and told it was empty--i.e. not loaded, not even with live blanks. There's a trial going on to determine the guilt of one person involved in that debacle and there will likely be at least one more after that.

Here is Branca arguing Hanna is not guilty.

More and more, I'm getting the feeling that Branca says what he thinks will get him the most views on his videos.

[Metal god]

Ive observed Branca makes the argument/s based on specific law , not always agreeing with the argument. Often do to questions he gets . That was a “short” clip of a much longer conversation . I believe the general topic was intervening circumstances . During that conversation he just threw out that argument/theory . As an attorney isn’t that pretty much your job , figure out any argument that will get an acquittal or a hung jury . Just look at some of the recent Supreme Court cases or other high profile cases in the news lately . it’s pretty clear they attorneys on either side will say anything to win, regardless of how ridiculous . Hell here in California, we had the state, claiming the prohibition of blacks owning firearms was a good enough historical tradition to show the banning of firearms is constitutional . Showing some will say anything to win - mike-drop haha

It’s not wrong on it’s face as far as - had Baldwin practiced all SAG and general safety rules there would likely not been any injuries let alone a death .

That said Hanna said in the police interview or on the phone with someone ( I know I heard here say it somewhere) she loaded the gun and handed it to the AD or who ever ( forget ) and claimed it cold or what ever wording they use on set . I still think once thats done by the armorer , nobody should be opening the gun and pulling out bullets to see if the gun has live rounds in it . Its been said several times you can’t tell if there is a live round or a dummy in the cylinder when that type of firearm is loaded .

This brings up the question , what is an actor to do in that circumstance? Completely unload the gun to check ?? No cus we also heard testimony some if not many armorers place the cold or hot gun directly into the holster or wherever its to be for the start of the scene . If thats even somewhat true how is an actor ever supposed to check and see if the gun is loaded ?

Ok now we talk “loaded” . The gun WAS loaded and everyone knew that so again what was the actor supposed to check specifically? Was he supposed to unloaded every round and shake them or check for primers or holes ?

IDK but I have a suspicion either Alec Baldwin a professional armor or both is going to get up on the stand in Baldwin trial and say the actor never unloads the gun and checks the ammunition before a scene , that’s why you have a professional armorer on set .

Anyways, that’s my thoughts on this specific topic

[stagpanther]

More and more, I'm getting the feeling that Branca says what he thinks will get him the most views on his videos.

No way! I mean, there's no way his product endorsements and pay-per-comments would have anything to do with that.

[Metal god]

Yeah that does get annoying haha

[HiBC]

IMO, "The Code" among those who use firearms,is this:

If I am handing you a firearm,immediately before I hand it to you(not 5 minutes ago) I check its load status. Its part of the transfer.

As you receive the firearm,you check it again. Yes. Redundancy.

The idea the firearm could be prepped before lunch ,locked in a safe or not,
after lunch whatever check was done is expired.

To be passed through two or three more people is ridiculous. Thats the sort of thing that gets people killed.

The function of the trial is to find out what happened and who is responsible for what.

I confess to being somewhat sympathetic to Hannah,Daughter of Thell.

But that only goes so far. I can't call her innocent. Factors like alleged drug use do not help.

However, I watched the episode of the prop supplier about his problem scrounging dummy rounds ,gun from 1883 in the prop truck, steel wool polishing gungy ammo,sending a cardboard box of reclaimed dummies with the other prop manager....(See youtube vid titled :‘Rust’ Prop Manufacturer Says He Didn’t Supply Real Bullet Alec Baldwin Used in Movie Shooting) Its revealing.


Hanna could have been an apprentice. A good mentor and some experience and confidence to be able to say "No" were lacking.
It was not a situation for John Wayne to throw her in the creek and say "Sink or swim"

An Armorer's competency must be a proven commodity.

In the chain of events, Hannah, Thell, and a number of folks along the way should have said "Hannah, you are not ready."

It seems to me Baldwin may have wanted someone he could bully into being an "armorer" who would not say "No".
I wonder if Baldwin shrugged off the responsibility of safe operation knowing he had a scapegoat armorer as a degree of separation if he shot someone.

Given the task they were working on in the church that day, no actual filming product was being made. There was no need for any blank or dummy rounds for any purpose. Period.

In another scene,when Baldwin comes through the door blazing away, then he is down,he comes up shouting orders using the sixgun for a pointer. Totally inexcusable.

In another scene, a minor character in a long brown overcoat was waving a double barrel shotgun around pointing it at several people.
No one said "Hey!! Watch the muzzles!" Better would be "I'll take the shotgun"

Then its TIME FOR (Yes ,TAKE TIME!) to have a meeting. Clearly state "ANY cast or crew can holler "Cut! Stop what you are doing,hold what you got"
upon seeing an unsafe condition.

And SAG ought to back them up.

But,they did not do that so Halyna is dead.

The "Rust" project hired an Armorer who was not ready. She failed.

The prop house was sloppy with ammo and guns. They failed.

Baldwin was a narcissist freak little boy with a gun. He failed.

Every Grip and Gaffer, etc who now express their concerns failed because they did not say "BS,this is wrong! at a time when it could have saved a life.

It might be the only folks who got it right were those who walked off the job.

And they should have been on the phone reporting things.

Even Halyna may have failed when she did not tell Baldwin "Don't point that gun at me" It may have happened too fast, but NO ONE should tolerate sloppy gun handling.

That includes a group pheasant hunt lunch break with old hump back Browning semi autos being waved around,

[s3779m]

HiBC, you nailed it. Where as nobody expects "actors" to be firearm experts, they should not be expected to be totally clueless either. Baldwin may not have known anything about firearms, but I find it too hard to believe he did not know basic firearm safety. There were plenty around him that knew better than to aim directly at someone and pull the trigger. Had he not been such a narcissist freak, people would have spoken up. IMHO, the biggest error I have seen so far is Baldwin operated on a my way or the highway. His orders superseded safety.

[44 AMP]

it’s pretty clear they attorneys on either side will say anything to win, regardless of how ridiculous

Do remember that, in court, neither the defense nor the prosecution lawyers are under oath to tell "the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth".

Neither, is the judge, for that matter.

we also heard testimony some if not many armorers place the cold or hot gun directly into the holster or wherever its to be for the start of the scene . If thats even somewhat true how is an actor ever supposed to check and see if the gun is loaded ?

IDK but I have a suspicion either Alec Baldwin a professional armor or both is going to get up on the stand in Baldwin trial and say the actor never unloads the gun and checks the ammunition before a scene

My understanding of the applicable SAG rules is that the guns are not supposed to be loaded with anything when brought to the set. The ARMORER then loads the gun IN FRONT OF THE ACTOR, director and everyone else, shaking each dummy in front of the actor to hear the rattle of the BBs inside proving it is not a live round, then places the "loaded" gun into the actor's holster or hands. No one else touches the gun.

Testimony that the actor never unloads the gun to check the ammunition before a scene would be accurate and truthful, because, IF the rules were followed, the actor doesn't need to do that, he SAW and HEARD that they were dummies, when the gun was loaded in front of him, and no one else has touched it, and the gun has not been out of his sight, or physical control.

As I understand it, under the movie rules, IF the "loaded" gun does get out of the actor's sight, and physical control, the armorer is supposed to unload the gun, then repeat the loading process completely, again, so everyone can see that dummies or blanks are used.

Also, as I understand it, the rules require that the armorer bring the guns to the set, and be present as long as the guns are there. And that guns should not be on the set when they are not required for filming. As I understand it, when the guns are not required to be on the set for filming, they are supposed to be secured under lock and key and the armorer is supposed to be the only one with the key.

Having worked in industry where this rule applied to certain things, I can tell you that there is almost never "just" one key. There is nearly always a second key, and it is kept by management, secured so that no one else has access to it without direct approval by the manager in charge of the keybox. It is there for emergency response use only if the authorized key custodian cannot be reached, and not for the use as a convenience to the production schedule. And, of course, there is always the "master key" (boltcutters) if needed, but use of the master key leaves evidence it was used (cut lock) while someone using the "spare" key (with or without management permission) does not.

SO, consider this "hypothetical" situation...
The crew is going to /or on the set to rehearse, check camera angles, lighting, etc. Guns are not needed for this, so the armorer is sent to a different location, to conduct other property management duties.

Then someone with the "boss" authority decided they do want the guns on the set, to enhance the realism of the rehearsal. They don't recall the armorer from where they were sent, the send someone else (with the spare key) to get the guns, and ammo, and bring them to the set.

Then on the set, someone who is not the armorer (because they are not there) loads the guns and hands them to the actors. The actor(s) "know" the guns are not loaded with live ammo, because they have been told so, and since they "know" the guns are "harmless" they screw around with them, practicing drawing operating the mechanisms, without regard for who or what the guns are pointed at. That day, on that set, during rehearsal, that resulted in a woman being killed and a man injured.

How many industry rules with broken or completely ignored? Nearly every one. How much of that is actually the armorer's fault??

we don't know if the hypothetical I just proposed was what actually went on at the RUST site or not, but it seems plausible to me. Hopefully we will eventually have sworn testimony covering what happened.

[MZ5]

The guilty verdict is already in, isn't it?

[mehavey]

Yes.
It is, in my opinion, a miscarriage.

[stagpanther]

It didn't help that the defense and its witnesses were basically a dog and pony show and that the prosecutor was actually pretty good. Baldwin's trial is going to be the really interesting part since large amounts of money has a funny way of tilting the quality of defense in our system of justice. I suspect they'll go after Baldwin for ignoring warning signs and deliberately putting people in charge of things they were not qualified for and that he knew it or should have known it-- rather than get bogged down on "did he pull the trigger or didn't he" or "did he aim it at her or didn't he" (though I'm sure that will be brought up).

[Aguila Blanca]

Verdict:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1SmVuCHvhOg

I'm nearly to the end of the defense closing argument (in a different video). I think her attorney did a decent job of pointing out numerous flaws in the government's case, so I have to say that I think the jury messed up. But -- that's the system. Gutierrez might have been better off waiving the jury and opting for a bench trial, but that's always a crap shoot.

[5whiskey]

Welp I was wrong on that one. I am shocked though.

[Metal god]

I was going to post the verdict but I’ll wait to be sure AB finishes and anybody else just in case they don’t know yet ;-)

[stagpanther]

I am sympathetic to Guiterrez--I think she was let down by a whole lot of people in her life that led her to poor choices indirectly--including her parents IMO, and I do hope she can appeal in some way. I think her career as an armorer is probably done for as a result of this; but I hope mitigating circumstances come together for her so she serves as little time as possible--and she gets a fresh start in a still promising future. Those of you hoping to see Baldwin skewered--I think it will happen for reasons beyond just having pulled the trigger (assuming he did, which I do, but hasn't been proven). All around just a tragedy for everyone involved.

[Metal god]

Her career as an armorer is over because of the felony conviction . She’s not allowed to be handling firearms anymore in that capacity as far as I can tell . As far as appeal, it’s not even worth it . I believe the max sentence is 18 months for this conviction . Meaning She will likely serve all of her time before the appeals process is over . I’m no expert in sentencing and time you actually spend in jail but It’s unlikely even if given the max sentence that she will spend the entire 18 months in jail so ……

I feel sorry for her too or have empathy or something. I’m not sure what it is or why because I really shouldn’t. . She screwed up big time, and I normally would have very little compassion for that but for some reason, I don’t know why I wish she was acquitted for some reason . I guess I’m gonna have to work that on my own .

[Aguila Blanca]

Originally Posted by Metal god

Her career as an armorer is over because of the felony conviction . She’s not allowed to be handling firearms anymore in that capacity as far as I can tell .

She won't be allowed to touch a firearm OR ammunition in any capacity. That alone will probably make an appeal worthwhile. But, I'm not sure what grounds they have for an appeal. You can't just appeal a jury's verdict, so any appeal will have to allege some sort of procedural error.

The videos shut off the audio when the two attorneys approached the bench to discuss objections, so we have no way of knowing if the judge may have goofed on any of those. I guess we'll just have to wait and see.

[stagpanther]

She screwed up big time, and I normally would have very little compassion for that but for some reason, I don’t know why I wish she was acquitted for some reason . I guess I’m gonna have to work that on my own .

I feel the same way. I once stuck the wrong cartridge in a rifle and fired it at the range--it fired, nothing happened and it was pointed at the target--but I stiil made the error. Not the same thing as what she was entrusted to do, but I know slip-ups can happen if you're not extra careful.

[Metal god]

VERY good point AB , restoring your 2A right is a very good reason to appeal .

[HiBC]

I think from the start there was not going to be a "Good" outcome to Hannah's case. If she got off with no consequences, IMO, that would not seem right either.
Fair? Remember Halyna was a Mom. Hannah may not ever be able to work with firearms again. I'm sympathetic to Hannah and some things don't seem "fair" for Hannah.
But what about Halyna and her kids? How fair is that? Its for the rest of their lives,too.

A big rock hit the pond and the ripples reach far.

If we accept some jobs,they come with big responsibility. Part of accepting the job is accepting the responsibility.

A Nurse might deliver meds ,an electrician tames electricity. A Friend of mine died in a housefire because the labor crew who worked on the deck out back left a pile of deck oil stain rags against the house.

I've machined parts that went in applications from submarines to aircraft to a Caterpillar engine that might be in a crab fishing boat. Or the engine that fires up to run the sprinkler system in a tall building in case of fire.
I kept in mind lives depended on the job I did. Like your Gunsmith,or the Guy at Boeing who attaches hatch doors.

And I spent some time as a school custodian. Cleaning the rest rooms,drinking fountains,etc I recognized I was responsible for the kids.

Anyone in the food prep business has responsibilities.

Sometimes we have to say "No, I'm, not doing that. " Even if the boss will throw a tantrum.

Back to the group pheasant hunt, If Elmer Fudd has his shotgun over his shoulder and his muzzle is sweeping everyone behind him, ....No need to loudly call him out. But we CAN approach him quietly and whisper "Hey,Fuddzy...you may not be aware,but ...."

We ALL have a responsibility ,

To speak up and confront a Baldwin might have saved a life.

How many RUST cast and crew share responsibility ?

Next time you get the chance,do the right thing.

[44 AMP]

There is no question that she, and several others, were negligent. A jury has decided her negligence met the standard for criminal negligence, a death resulted from that negligence and convicted her of manslaughter.

The forms were followed, the process was run, and we have a result in the form of a jury verdict. Whether or not you or I think it was the right verdict, or a fair verdict does not matter. Justice, under our legal system, was done.

I'm sure Baldwin's defense team will try and use the conviction to argue how Baldwin wasn't responsible for the shooting. I don't buy that, and I hope his jury won't either.

[HiBC]

Baldwin can be abusive and domineering.
In a supportive environment, that encourages safety, Hannah may have been able to do ok....but she did have some problems....like "partying".

Revisit the scene where Baldwin comes through the door guns blazing,then he's down.
He rises up some, starts shouting orders while using the gun for a pointer.

He wants to do the scene over, He wants a reload NOW!! Hurry Hurry!

Seems like a "Hostile Environment" Management is hostile to taking the time to follow SAG safety guidelines.

An LEO or Combat Veteran ,or MMA fighter at 24 years old might have the confidence to go full R. Lee Emerey Gunny nose to nose with Baldwin ,

But I don't think Hannah would do that. If that is the requirement, Hannah was not the right hire.

But then, neither was Baldwin.

At least not in a Leadership/ Management role.

We have too many Managers and too few LEADERS

[Ricklin]

One of the concepts I live my life by, that is not what is going to occur in this case when IMO the real bad guy goes to trial.
The buck stops here. That's Baldwin. Whether or not he pulled the trigger (he did) actors do not check weapons like we check weapons. They do not handle weapons like we handle weapons, they point guns at people, on purpose when the script calls for it.
The walk outs over safety will do him no favors, and rightfully so.
Baldwin fully allowed the poor environment to develop over months, why nothing mentioned with regard to the recreational plinking after hours?
Hannah has responsibility here as well, there is plenty to go around. Her ultimate boss is the real bad guy.
Let's try the correct individual for the death, for the reasons she died which was not that Baldwin pulled the trigger, he had to. It's how the live round found it's way to that Pietta SAA clone.