If you believe that prison (or any criminal sentence) is for rehabilitation and restoration instead of punishment, what’s the hopeful outcome here?
I’m sure the guy already isn’t going to want to work with real guns on any future movie set. Sending him to a rich white guy prison for 18 months won’t change that. Nor will it change the laws or practices of what’s happening on movie sets. And it won’t bring any restitution to the victims’ family unless they, in turn, sue.
Seems like the best outcome here would be a plea deal that involves pleading “no contest”, barred from using real firearms, and committing to financial restitution for the family.
I mean, in his role of producer he was negligent in hiring someone without experience to handle the guns (in a western, even!).
I feel like producers should know there could be more than just a financial penalty when you cut corners so much somebody got killed.
Edit: looks like they’re actually going after him as an actor, which IMHO is kind of ridiculous. If you expect blanks to be in the gun, and someone loads live ammo in there that’s not even supposed to be on set, that’s not your fault.
Yeah, there is a large fixation on whether he did or did not pull the trigger and I genuinely feel like that’s not the straw that breaks the camel’s back, because ultimately he was told it was a clear gun.
What matters is:
Did he know that there were serious concerns about gun safety on set?
Did he use his star power/producer role to silence those concerns?
Did he retaliate against people who raised those concerns?
If he did any of those three things, then you have a rapidly strengthening case that he knowingly endangered the crew, and he should have known NOT to have aimed that gun at anybody. You made that gun unsafe and then the gun went off in your hands because you reaped what you sowed.
There’s truth to what you say, and I’m not personally a fan of any of the Baldwins, but most of the prosecution of this case has just seemed spiteful and nonsensical to me.
Like, there are cases to be made for Baldwin or the production company to be liable, but they seem to be framing everything as him just straight up murdering the woman, simply because he was holding the weapon. I’d say there are people behind the scenes that were much more responsible for the tragedy than the Actor that was in the scene and handed a hot weapon (including Baldwin, the producer not the actor).
Yeah, agreed that the prosecution is just trying to make a name for themselves by taking on a big Hollywood liberal. If they actually cared about avoiding this in the future, they’d take the producer angle, but obviously they don’t want to set the precedent that a corporation or its officers face real consequences for cutting corners.
Valid points! It looks like this was only her second film as armorer and the line producer scolded her for spending too much time focusing on armory. She warned that mistakes would happen.
If you believe that prison (or any criminal sentence) is for rehabilitation and restoration instead of punishment, what’s the hopeful outcome here?
I’m sure the guy already isn’t going to want to work with real guns on any future movie set. Sending him to a rich white guy prison for 18 months won’t change that. Nor will it change the laws or practices of what’s happening on movie sets. And it won’t bring any restitution to the victims’ family unless they, in turn, sue.
Seems like the best outcome here would be a plea deal that involves pleading “no contest”, barred from using real firearms, and committing to financial restitution for the family.
I mean, in his role of producer he was negligent in hiring someone without experience to handle the guns (in a western, even!).
I feel like producers should know there could be more than just a financial penalty when you cut corners so much somebody got killed.
Edit: looks like they’re actually going after him as an actor, which IMHO is kind of ridiculous. If you expect blanks to be in the gun, and someone loads live ammo in there that’s not even supposed to be on set, that’s not your fault.
Yeah, there is a large fixation on whether he did or did not pull the trigger and I genuinely feel like that’s not the straw that breaks the camel’s back, because ultimately he was told it was a clear gun.
What matters is:
Did he know that there were serious concerns about gun safety on set?
Did he use his star power/producer role to silence those concerns?
Did he retaliate against people who raised those concerns?
If he did any of those three things, then you have a rapidly strengthening case that he knowingly endangered the crew, and he should have known NOT to have aimed that gun at anybody. You made that gun unsafe and then the gun went off in your hands because you reaped what you sowed.
Totally agree
There’s truth to what you say, and I’m not personally a fan of any of the Baldwins, but most of the prosecution of this case has just seemed spiteful and nonsensical to me.
Like, there are cases to be made for Baldwin or the production company to be liable, but they seem to be framing everything as him just straight up murdering the woman, simply because he was holding the weapon. I’d say there are people behind the scenes that were much more responsible for the tragedy than the Actor that was in the scene and handed a hot weapon (including Baldwin, the producer not the actor).
Yeah, agreed that the prosecution is just trying to make a name for themselves by taking on a big Hollywood liberal. If they actually cared about avoiding this in the future, they’d take the producer angle, but obviously they don’t want to set the precedent that a corporation or its officers face real consequences for cutting corners.
Valid points! It looks like this was only her second film as armorer and the line producer scolded her for spending too much time focusing on armory. She warned that mistakes would happen.
https://www.latimes.com/entertainment-arts/business/story/2022-01-28/rust-emails-armorer-hannah-gutierrez-reed