Alec Baldwin fatally shoots woman with prop gun on movie set

I swear judge I just accidentally pointed my gun and it decided to go off twice in the chest and the recoil of the first shot moved the gun to the head, What is a double tap? I only know the ones that are hot and cold honest!
 
"new facts" and a deal done behind the scenes between Baldwin and the widower of the deceased seems to have got Baldwin off the hook but looks like they are attempting to throw the armourer under the bus instead.
 
Armourer being thrown under the bus by being accused of having... ultimate responsibility for the arms?

What an unreasonable angle.

Well yeah but looks like they are making sure the focus is on her to deflect anything which might come back on Baldwin.
 
"new facts" and a deal done behind the scenes between Baldwin and the widower of the deceased seems to have got Baldwin off the hook but looks like they are attempting to throw the armourer under the bus instead.

The buck stops with the armourer, she bears primary responsibility., Nobody's throwing her under the bus, she's being held accountable.
 
Last edited:
The buck stops with the armourer, she bears primary responsibility., Nobody's throwing her under the bus, she's being held accountable.

I'm not saying she doesn't as per my older posts, but as it stands it seems any angle which might come down to Baldwin is being deflected to her regardless.
 
You sure?

Baldwin has money and you could hear the stampede of lawyers wanting to get a shot at suing Baldwin for that juicy pay day.

I don't see people queuing up to sue the armourer despite the case being stronger.
 
Oh here's the reason the prosecution decided they were not in a good position to charge Baldwin: https://abcnews.go.com/US/gun-fatal-set-rust-shooting-mechanically-improper-source/story?id=98760315

You remember Baldwin denying pulling the trigger (yeah yeah what a lame excuse etc)

Well apparently the gun internals are in such a garbage condition that yes, the gun could fire without pulling the trigger.

I guess this lands on the armourer again but, goddam, who else can it land on.

That would be the "new facts" that got the charges on Baldwin dropped.
 
You sure?

Baldwin has money and you could hear the stampede of lawyers wanting to get a shot at suing Baldwin for that juicy pay day.

I don't see people queuing up to sue the armourer despite the case being stronger.

I'm talking Baldwin's team and those on that side of the case. He has pending civil action against him.
 
Oh here's the reason the prosecution decided they were not in a good position to charge Baldwin: https://abcnews.go.com/US/gun-fatal-set-rust-shooting-mechanically-improper-source/story?id=98760315

You remember Baldwin denying pulling the trigger (yeah yeah what a lame excuse etc)

Well apparently the gun internals are in such a garbage condition that yes, the gun could fire without pulling the trigger.

That is at odds to the FBI who said the gun was in working order and could only be fired if the trigger was pulled which is what ABC (who is linked in the quote) reported -


Plus other sites -



etc

Which makes this "new" evidence very odd when it apparently directly counteracts the FBI, mistakes could always happen of course.
 
Back
Top Bottom