I asked you for evidence first. Her training with guns by an expert in the field started 8 years ago. She had 2 years at Synthfire media as one example. She worked as Yellowstone Film Ranch not as head armorer but as an armorer loading firearms with appropriately sized blanks. Ensuring gun safety on set along with instructing actors on how to use their guns which is evidence enough to show she has more expreince then you say. She talked about being on set of other films, helping the head armorer, working with the prop master linked to guns e.c.t She has a decent range of expreince over a decent area of film making going over many years. She had years of training by a gun expert.
Anyway as for "In a recent statement it says on set she fought for training days for the actors, days to maintained weapons, proper time to prepare for gunfire but was ultimately overruled by the production and department. She complained about the lack of safety meetings. The statement also makes it clear she was not a full-time armorer. They only had her working part time as armorer. Its looking more and more like she was not allowed to prepare the weapons and that she was not the full-time armorer. It looks like the incident happened when she was not working as armorer. She was not there at the table when the weapon was taken."
That's mostly from an official statement signed by two lawyers. So you call an official statement signed by two lawyers absolute rubbish and easy to debunk. Go on then debunked that statement. I am sure the two lawyers will be interested how you can debunk what they say.
Last edited:
