National Gun Forum banner
61 - 80 of 95 Posts

·
Last Stand on Earth
Joined
·
4,413 Posts
It wasn't involuntary manslaughter. It was a stupid accident. He's an egotistical jerk but that, in itself, is not a crime. If he committed a crime, reckless endangerment is the most serious thing that I can see flying.
No, what he did was point an actual firearm at a human being and deliberately pulled the trigger without checking to see if it was loaded. That is by definition, involuntarily manslaughter. The only way around that is if by some miracle, being told it was unloaded excuses him of guilt.
 

·
Grand Imperial Poobah
Joined
·
26,341 Posts
Discussion Starter · #63 ·
It wasn't involuntary manslaughter. It was a stupid accident. He's an egotistical jerk but that, in itself, is not a crime. If he committed a crime, reckless endangerment is the most serious thing that I can see flying.

Involuntary Manslaughter
The act of unlawfully killing another human being unintentionally.

Most unintentional killings are not murder but involuntary manslaughter. The absence of the element of intent is the key distinguishing factor between voluntary and involuntary manslaughter. In most states involuntary manslaughter results from an improper use of reasonable care or skill while performing a legal act, or while committing an act that is unlawful but not felonious.

Many states do not define involuntary manslaughter, or define it vaguely in common-law terms. Some jurisdictions describe the amount of Negligence necessary to constitute manslaughter with terms such as criminal negligence, gross negligence, and culpable negligence. The only certainty that can be attached to these terms is that they require more than the ordinary negligence standard in a civil case. With this approach the state does not have to prove that the defendant was aware of the risk.

Other jurisdictions apply more subjective tests, such as "reckless" or "wanton," to describe the amount of negligence needed to constitute involuntary manslaughter. In this approach the defendant must have personally appreciated a risk and then chosen to take it anyway.

There are two types of involuntary manslaughter statutes: criminally negligent manslaughter and unlawful act manslaughter. Criminally negligent manslaughter occurs when death results from a high degree of negligence or recklessness. Modern criminal codes generally require a consciousness of risk and under some codes the absence of this element makes the offense a less serious Homicide.

An omission to act or a failure to perform a duty constitutes criminally negligent manslaughter. The existence of the duty is essential. Since the law does not recognize that an ordinary person has a duty to aid or rescue another in distress, a death resulting from an ordinary person's failure to act is not manslaughter. On the other hand, an omission by someone who has a duty, such as a failure to attempt to save a drowning person by a lifeguard, might constitute involuntary manslaughter.

In many jurisdictions death that results from the operation of a vehicle in a criminally negligent manner is punishable as a separate offense. Usually it is considered a less severe offense than involuntary manslaughter. These jurisdictions usually call the offense reckless homicide, negligent homicide, or vehicular homicide. One reason for this lesser offense is the reluctance of juries to convict automobile drivers of manslaughter.

Unlawful act manslaughter occurs when someone causes a death while committing or attempting to commit an unlawful act, usually a misdemeanor. Some states distinguish between conduct that is malum in se (bad in itself) and conduct that is malum prohibitum (bad because it is prohibited by law). Conduct that is malum in se is based on common-law definitions of crime; for example, an Assault and Battery could be classified as malum in se. Acts that are made illegal by legislation—for example, reckless driving—are malum prohibitum. In states that use this distinction, an act must be malum in se to constitute manslaughter. If an act is malum prohibitum, it is not manslaughter unless the person who committed it could have foreseen that death would be a direct result of the act.

In other states this distinction is not made. If death results from an unlawful act, the person who committed the act may be prosecuted for involuntary manslaughter even if the act was malum prohibitum. Courts will uphold unlawful act manslaughter where the statute was intended to prevent injury to another person.
 

·
Grand Imperial Poobah
Joined
·
26,341 Posts
Discussion Starter · #64 ·

Nolte: Attorney Says Alec Baldwin ‘Needs to Start Thinking like a Potential Defendant’

Attorney Andrew Stoltmann believes actor Alec Baldwin “needs to start thinking like a potential defendant instead of just somebody who made a tragic mistake.”

“There are crimes that cover this sort of situation depending on his level of culpability.”

“I’m certainly not saying he’s going to be charged,” the Chicago-based attorney told Fox News, “but what I am saying is anytime somebody shoots another human being – even on accident, even in self-defense – the police and eventually prosecutors look very, very carefully at what happened.”

“There are literally about a hundred different issues that would need to be resolved, but there is something called negligent homicide,” he added.

“[T]he $64,000 question is: What role did he have with respect to preparing this gun? Were there any testing processes or procedures that he skipped or didn’t partake in?”

Watch below:



While we have no firm grasp on how this tragedy unfolded, this is excellent advice. And Baldwin was not just an actor in the film. He was also a producer, which means he holds responsibilities when it comes to hiring, and this could include hiring the prop people and/or armorer.

Also, as the unfortunate person who accidentally shot and killed someone, on top of any criminal liability, Baldwin is facing civil liability—not just as the shooter but as the producer.


(Jim Weber/Santa Fe New Mexican via AP

Another concern is that we are now hearing stories about safety concerns on the set just prior to the shooting, including concerns about firearms and misfires. If true, this will only increase the liability issues.

Attorney Christopher Melcher told Fox News that if Baldwin was “playing around” with the gun or if he was handed the gun and didn’t verify its status as loaded or not, that “would be reckless” and would potentially make Baldwin “responsible.”

Early reports tell us the shooting happened during a rehearsal, which is another potential problem. My understanding is that no one is supposed to be handed a working gun until cameras roll. For rehearsals, a rubber or resin gun is used.

As far as Baldwin’s liability, here are the questions as I see them…

  • As a producer, what was his role in hiring the prop people who are almost certainly responsible for this accident?
  • What was his official requirement as an actor when it came to checking the gun himself? He certainly had a moral responsibility to do so.
  • If this was a rehearsal, why was he pointing a gun at people and pulling the trigger?
  • If this was a rehearsal, why was he not given a fake gun?
  • Regardless, why was he pointing a gun at the director of photography (who was killed)? Was this at the request of the director (who was injured)?

Whatever the answers, this never-ever-ever should have happened.

The established safeguards for the use of firearms on movie and television shoots are foolproof … if followed.

This attorney is correct that Baldwin must immediately act under the assumption he will be charged with manslaughter or negligent homicide. That doesn’t mean he will be, and that doesn’t mean that this wasn’t still a tragic accident if he is. But if your negligent or reckless behavior causes someone’s death, criminal charges are possible regardless of your intent.

No one believes Baldwin intended to hurt or kill anyone. In that way, he is another victim of all this. His life is forever changed. I can’t imagine what he’s going through now or what it will be like to live with what he did.

We should not forget that we’re all a stupid mistake away from taking a life, especially when we’re behind the wheel of a car. There but for the grace of God, go I. My heart breaks for everyone involved, including Alec Baldwin. He will not only be dealing with legal and civil liabilities but a poisonous kangaroo court of public opinion.

Like Halyna Hutchins, the 42-year-old wife, mother, and cinematographer shot and killed, Baldwin might be a victim of his own criminal negligence. So for the sake of his own family and his own civil rights, he better lawyer up.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
192 Posts
I think the deciding factor will be his experience with firearms. If his knowledge is limited to just on film, then he might have a chance. If he actually knows basic firearm safety knowledge, then I'd say he's got a fight on his hands.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,198 Posts
News this morning was saying that Hollywood is rethinking live guns on sets.
No more operating guns. Airsoft and digitally enhanced guns only.
I guess that will work out okay with what they can do with computers today.
With all the movies and TV shows made this is still a rare occurrence. But this will be a feel good knee jerk reaction in a pretty liberal run industry.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,451 Posts
Well, somebody who hates guns, and wants no one else to own them, because HE IS AWARE OF THE DAMAGE THEY CAN DO, should be held to the higher standard. He blithely ignored gun safety, after his position on gun control makes it blatantly obvious he knows how dangerous firearms have the potential to be.

Sounds like "gross negligence, leading to manslaughter", to me.
 

·
AZHerper
Joined
·
5,163 Posts

Involuntary Manslaughter
The act of unlawfully killing another human being unintentionally.

Most unintentional killings are not murder but involuntary manslaughter. The absence of the element of intent is the key distinguishing factor between voluntary and involuntary manslaughter. In most states involuntary manslaughter results from an improper use of reasonable care or skill while performing a legal act, or while committing an act that is unlawful but not felonious.

Many states do not define involuntary manslaughter, or define it vaguely in common-law terms. Some jurisdictions describe the amount of Negligence necessary to constitute manslaughter with terms such as criminal negligence, gross negligence, and culpable negligence. The only certainty that can be attached to these terms is that they require more than the ordinary negligence standard in a civil case. With this approach the state does not have to prove that the defendant was aware of the risk.

Other jurisdictions apply more subjective tests, such as "reckless" or "wanton," to describe the amount of negligence needed to constitute involuntary manslaughter. In this approach the defendant must have personally appreciated a risk and then chosen to take it anyway.

There are two types of involuntary manslaughter statutes: criminally negligent manslaughter and unlawful act manslaughter. Criminally negligent manslaughter occurs when death results from a high degree of negligence or recklessness. Modern criminal codes generally require a consciousness of risk and under some codes the absence of this element makes the offense a less serious Homicide.

An omission to act or a failure to perform a duty constitutes criminally negligent manslaughter. The existence of the duty is essential. Since the law does not recognize that an ordinary person has a duty to aid or rescue another in distress, a death resulting from an ordinary person's failure to act is not manslaughter. On the other hand, an omission by someone who has a duty, such as a failure to attempt to save a drowning person by a lifeguard, might constitute involuntary manslaughter.

In many jurisdictions death that results from the operation of a vehicle in a criminally negligent manner is punishable as a separate offense. Usually it is considered a less severe offense than involuntary manslaughter. These jurisdictions usually call the offense reckless homicide, negligent homicide, or vehicular homicide. One reason for this lesser offense is the reluctance of juries to convict automobile drivers of manslaughter.

Unlawful act manslaughter occurs when someone causes a death while committing or attempting to commit an unlawful act, usually a misdemeanor. Some states distinguish between conduct that is malum in se (bad in itself) and conduct that is malum prohibitum (bad because it is prohibited by law). Conduct that is malum in se is based on common-law definitions of crime; for example, an Assault and Battery could be classified as malum in se. Acts that are made illegal by legislation—for example, reckless driving—are malum prohibitum. In states that use this distinction, an act must be malum in se to constitute manslaughter. If an act is malum prohibitum, it is not manslaughter unless the person who committed it could have foreseen that death would be a direct result of the act.

In other states this distinction is not made. If death results from an unlawful act, the person who committed the act may be prosecuted for involuntary manslaughter even if the act was malum prohibitum. Courts will uphold unlawful act manslaughter where the statute was intended to prevent injury to another person.
As has been stated many times, "a zealous prosecutor can indict a ham sandwich". These definitions are highly debatable and it's unlikely to happen here.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
15,520 Posts
Aint nothing going to happen to him except maybe have to pay some money.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
15,918 Posts
Just repo Fox, they were rehearsing a scene where baldwin points the gun at the camera and fires. The assistant director, who handed baldwin the gun, yelled "cold gun". So someone put a live round in that gun before the scene, so now it's a who dunnit.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
15,520 Posts
Just repo Fox, they were rehearsing a scene where baldwin points the gun at the camera and fires. The assistant director, who handed baldwin the gun, yelled "cold gun". So someone put a live round in that gun before the scene, so now it's a who dunnit.
Finger prints on the shell case.....Though i did read that possibly someone removed it from the gun after the shooting and before the police got there. If true that sounds a bit like tampering with evidence.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Caveman Jim

·
Grand Imperial Poobah
Joined
·
26,341 Posts
Discussion Starter · #75 ·
So, if by chance Alec Baldwin has to stand trial and be judged by a jury of his peers do you think they will try to pick all democrats idiots???
Fixed it for ya.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,435 Posts
"She noted that the armorist, assistant director and the key grip are supposed to “check the gun … no matter what’s going on on set.

“And then very lastly, the actor checks the gun,” she said of Baldwin, who was also one of the movie’s executive producers.

“So there are four to five people in this stage,” she said, but “somehow there was a failure.”"

alec-baldwin-among-those-responsible-for-checking-gun-rust-crew-member-says

rust-actor-says-filming-movie-felt-life-threatening


If these reports are accurate things are looking worse for Baldwin with each story released.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,114 Posts
A very long read.

The head electrician on Alec Baldwin's Rust has shared the final photo of Halyna Hutchins filming on set in the church in which she was shot dead.

Serge Svetnoy was standing next to the cinematographer when she was killed during rehearsals as Baldwin practiced drawing the weapon in the church pew and it accidentally fired.

The experienced crew member has since described the harrowing moment he held his friend in his arms as she lay dying while she bled over his hands.

She was shot in the chest, while director Joel Souza was also wounded, and she stumbled back before collapsing, saying: 'I can't feel my legs.'

Penning an emotional post in tribute to his friend, Svetnoy blamed her death on 'negligence and unprofessionalism' as he blasted those responsible for not doing their jobs properly and claimed producers hired an inexperienced armorer.

He wrote: 'Yes, I was standing shoulder-to-shoulder with Halyna during this fatal shot that took her life and injured the director Joel Souza. I was holding her in my arms while she was dying. Her blood was on my hands.

'I do not wish anyone to go through what I went through, what her husband Matt Hutchins and her son Andros went through, and the actor Alec Baldwin, who has been handed a gun on set. He has to live with the thought that he took the life of the human because of unprofessional people.'

The electrician said Hannah Gutierrez-Reed, 24, who was named on Friday as the person who loaded Baldwin's vintage Colt pistol, was too young to be doing her job.


According to a police warrant, the Colt was one of three pistols left on a table by Gutierrez-Reed and was handed to Baldwin by British assistant director Dave Halls who told the veteran actor it was 'cold'- not realizing it had been loaded with live rounds.

Cops say Baldwin was practicing drawing the weapon when it fired – fatally hitting cinematographer Hutchins, 42, and injuring director Joel Souza, 48.

After the shooting, the armorer took possession of the gun and a spent casing, which were turned over to police, along with other prop guns and ammunition used on the set.

According to a call sheet obtained by DailyMail.com, the crew was rehearsing a mock gunfight inside the church building when Hutchins was hit.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
15,520 Posts
I feel the need to correct the reporter.
"as Baldwin practiced drawing the weapon in the church pew and it accidentally fired. ", "as Baldwin practiced drawing the weapon in the church pew and he cocked the hammer and pulled the trigger".
"Cops say Baldwin was practicing drawing the weapon when it fired ", "Cops say Baldwin was practicing drawing the weapon when he fired it".
 
  • Like
Reactions: Wag and SCARPETTA
61 - 80 of 95 Posts
Top