Alec Baldwin fatally shoots woman with prop gun on movie set

200sols said:
So how does a live round end up in the gun... sabotage?
Click to expand...

From the reports so far the crew was mucking around with them off set with live ammunition (presumably plinking stuff in the desert). With this particular firearm, the AD apparently picked it up from where it was laid down with two others off set (so armourer seemingly didn't have control of them), AD then brought it onto the set and simply handed it to Baldwin, saying "cold gun" but without actually having checked that himself, Baldwin has then seemingly also not checked it/obviously wasn't present when the AD or seemingly not present armorer did any checks and cracked on with practicing his cross draw or whatever along with the cinematographer who sadly died.

At least that is what seems to have been reported so far.
 
dowie said:
From the reports so far the crew was mucking around with them off set with live ammunition (presumably plinking stuff in the desert). With this particular firearm, the AD apparently picked it up from where it was laid down with two others off set (so armourer seemingly didn't have control of them), AD then brought it onto the set and simply handed it to Baldwin, saying "cold gun" but without actually having checked that himself....
Click to expand...

If that's the case then armourer left "live" weapons around and the AD didn't get confirmation that the gun was "cold"/unloaded; i think they're up **** creek....

dowie said:
...Baldwin has then seemingly also not checked it..
Click to expand...

I doubt most actors would in the same way the don't check levels with the sound tech or if the camera is rolling during a take - that's what the rest of the production crew is for.
 
It doesn’t take long, I received a WhatsApp today featuring Alec Baldwin done up in a flight suit, à la Tom Cruise, complete with helmet under his arm with Maverick stencilled on it, and a weird looking gun in his hand, plus an F-14 Tomcat in the background.
The banner above Baldwin’s head said, PROP GUN as opposed to TOP GUN.
 
Jean-F said:
It doesn’t take long, I received a WhatsApp today featuring Alec Baldwin done up in a flight suit, à la Tom Cruise, complete with helmet under his arm with Maverick stencilled on it, and a weird looking gun in his hand, plus an F-14 Tomcat in the background.
The banner above Baldwin’s head said, PROP GUN as opposed to TOP GUN.
Click to expand...

One of my 'cool edgy' friends sent that to me on Friday.
 
More info released. If true then the gun safety routines were shoddy.

In the newly released document Souza said someone identified the weapon as a “cold gun,” meaning it did not have any live rounds. But instead the gun discharged, striking Hutchins in her chest and Souza in his right shoulder, according to a Santa Fe County, N.M., sheriff’s detective’s affidavit used to obtain a search warrant. Hutchins was pronounced dead at an Albuquerque hospital.

Souza’s statement to the detective offered a new window into the on-set shooting Thursday that has left Hollywood reeling and calling for safer working conditions on sets.

The shooting took place after six members of the film’s crew walked off the set after complaining to the production company about payment and housing, camera operator Reid Russell told Det. Joel Cano. The affidavit offered the most detailed chronology yet of an unfolding tragedy.

The day started late because the production hired another camera crew and was working with only one camera, Souza told the detective.

Souza said three people were handling the gun for the scene: armorer Hannah Gutierrez Reed, then assistant director Dave Halls, who handed the gun to Baldwin, the affidavit said.

Halls had taken one of three prop guns set up by Gutierrez Reed on a cart left outside the structure because of COVID-19 restrictions, the affidavit said. Halls did not know live rounds were in the gun when he handed it to Baldwin, and Halls yelled “cold gun,” according to the affidavit.


Souza said cast and crew were preparing the scene before lunch but then had a meal away from the rehearsal area around 12:30 p.m., according to the affidavit. When they returned, Souza said, he wasn’t sure if the gun was checked again, the affidavit said.

“Joel said as far as he knows, no one gets checked for live ammunition on their person prior and after the scenes are being filmed,” the affidavit said. “The only thing checked are the firearms to avoid live ammunition being in them. Joel stated there should never be live rounds whatsoever, near or around the scene.”

When they came back from lunch, a creeping shadow prompted the camera to be moved to a different angle, Russell said in the affidavit. As Baldwin was explaining how he was going to draw his gun and where his arm would be when he pulled the gun from the holster, it discharged, Russell said.

Souza said he was looking over Hutchins’ shoulder when the gun discharged. Hutchins grabbed her midsection, stumbled backward and “was assisted to the ground,” Souza told the detective.

The search warrant said Russell recalled hearing a loud bang, seeing a bloody Souza and hearing Hutchins say she couldn’t feel her legs.

The shooting came after crew members raised concerns about safety conditions on set. Two “Rust” crew members told the L.A. Times that, less than a week earlier, a stunt double had fired two accidental prop gun discharges after being told the gun was “cold.”
Click to expand...

 
The old story of untrained people who aren't gun people. They are too relaxed with something potentially fatal. I've been a member of shooting clubs for 40 years, not one accident because the safety aspect is taken seriously. It's always loaded, even when you know it's not. Bet there will be some law suits flying around, obvious case of negligence imo.
 
Troezar said:
The old story of untrained people who aren't gun people. They are too relaxed with something potentially fatal. I've been a member of shooting clubs for 40 years, not one accident because the safety aspect is taken seriously. It's always loaded, even when you know it's not. Bet there will be some law suits flying around, obvious case of negligence imo.
Click to expand...

I think the mindset of the British also helps in this situation. Considering how hard and dangerous it is to even obtain a gun here.

For me at least the onus lies with the armourer. She was getting paid to do a job that she didn't do. If I was a HGV driver and I killed someone through negligence I would be doing time.
 
Silly people being silly. I'm not a gun person but I wouldn't be doing anything with a gun without checking whether it's loaded or not, let alone point it at someone.
 
Has it been said what type of gun it was yet? Im guessing a shotgun if it managed to hit 2 people in a single shot.
 
Gerard said:
Has it been said what type of gun it was yet? Im guessing a shotgun if it managed to hit 2 people in a single shot.
Click to expand...

It was a single shot pistol. Probably a colt dragoon but not confirmed. You wouldn't cross draw a shotgun.
 
Gerard said:
Has it been said what type of gun it was yet? Im guessing a shotgun if it managed to hit 2 people in a single shot.
Click to expand...

Maybe not. From the report I linked above he was practicing drawing across his chest so would be a revolver type weapon and the guy shot was behind the woman and was hit in the shoulder and the woman in the chest, maybe the bullet went through her and into him???
 
R.P.L said:
Silly people being silly. I'm not a gun person but I wouldn't be doing anything with a gun without checking whether it's loaded or not, let alone point it at someone.
Click to expand...

I would assume on some film sets most actors dont bother. There are already two people including the gun expert who have both declared the gun as safe and unloaded before passing it into your hands.
 
Greebo said:
I would assume on some film sets most actors dont bother. There are already two people including the gun expert who have both declared the gun as safe and unloaded before passing it into your hands.
Click to expand...

I'm sure you're right. Having witnessed countless people who are incompetent in their jobs over the years though, I wouldn't ever trust someone with something so important if I didn't have to. It only takes a few seconds after all.
 
visibleman said:
If that's the case then armourer left "live" weapons around and the AD didn't get confirmation that the gun was "cold"/unloaded; i think they're up **** creek....



I doubt most actors would in the same way the don't check levels with the sound tech or if the camera is rolling during a take - that's what the rest of the production crew is for.
Click to expand...

Getting sound levels wrong probably isn't going to get someone killed... probably...

While easy to claim after the fact several actors commenting on Twitter how it is standard practise for them to be in the loop of making sure a weapon is safe or not.
 
Greebo said:
I would assume on some film sets most actors dont bother. There are already two people including the gun expert who have both declared the gun as safe and unloaded before passing it into your hands.
Click to expand...

You're probably right but it is still very bad practice to not check yourself and even then you always assume it's loaded and lethal. What I've not seen mentioned much is it was a single action revolver. You can't just pull the trigger like modern double action revolver. You have to manually **** it and then pull the trigger, so it is a quite a deliberate action, albeit single action trigger have no take up and and lighter. Makes me cringe when I see some of the videos of "average Joe" American handing firearms. I'm not shooting anywhere where I'm getting "sweeped" by the muzzle of a loaded gun!
 
Greebo said:
Maybe not. From the report I linked above he was practicing drawing across his chest so would be a revolver type weapon and the guy shot was behind the woman and was hit in the shoulder and the woman in the chest, maybe the bullet went through her and into him???
Click to expand...

Yeah that's what seems to have happened he was crouched behind her, looking over her shoulder bullet went through her stomach/chest and into his shoulder
 
R.P.L said:
I'm sure you're right. Having witnessed countless people who are incompetent in their jobs over the years though, I wouldn't ever trust someone with something so important if I didn't have to. It only takes a few seconds after all.
Click to expand...

Obviously in this case the process didn't work and things went wrong and admittedly I'm posting in a state of ignorance about the legality of how this should happen. However, I do wonder about the repeated assertions in this thread that an actor should mess about with a prop and check it before using it on set, particularly opening up an apparent firearm and playing with the ammo. If there is an established health & safety and insurance approved process (e.g. the armourer declares the status of the relevant prop and gives it to the director, who hands it to the actor confirming how it is to be used for this scene) is it really the responsibility of the actor to say "Hang on guys, I'm just going to take out the ammo for a look before we start". Might that not require the director or armourer to take the prop back and start the process again, as it had been interfered with since they declared it safe?
 
Mr Badger said:
Obviously in this case the process didn't work and things went wrong and admittedly I'm posting in a state of ignorance about the legality of how this should happen. However, I do wonder about the repeated assertions in this thread that an actor should mess about with a prop and check it before using it on set, particularly opening up an apparent firearm and playing with the ammo. If there is an established health & safety and insurance approved process (e.g. the armourer declares the status of the relevant prop and gives it to the director, who hands it to the actor confirming how it is to be used for this scene) is it really the responsibility of the actor to say "Hang on guys, I'm just going to take out the ammo for a look before we start". Might that not require the director or armourer to take the prop back and start the process again, as it had been interfered with since they declared it safe?
Click to expand...

Valid point - I'm not sure if they're allowed to check.

EDIT: To clarify though, assuming it was allowed I'm not talking about someone with no clue just opening it up and having a play around. I'd be asking for training so that I could do it safely and correctly.

EDIT 2: and I'd expect that sort of training to be standard for anyone who has to handle firearms.
 
Mr Badger said:
Obviously in this case the process didn't work and things went wrong and admittedly I'm posting in a state of ignorance about the legality of how this should happen. However, I do wonder about the repeated assertions in this thread that an actor should mess about with a prop and check it before using it on set, particularly opening up an apparent firearm and playing with the ammo. If there is an established health & safety and insurance approved process (e.g. the armourer declares the status of the relevant prop and gives it to the director, who hands it to the actor confirming how it is to be used for this scene) is it really the responsibility of the actor to say "Hang on guys, I'm just going to take out the ammo for a look before we start". Might that not require the director or armourer to take the prop back and start the process again, as it had been interfered with since they declared it safe?
Click to expand...

If that is the process for their production, yes. It's not standard practice for handling firearms though. You're in charge of it, it's your responsibility. I can't see how they'd get insured if they weren't properly trained, I wouldn't touch them without it. The details will really determine who was culpable.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom