You are viewing a single thread.
View all comments View context
3 points

I don’t particularly think any kind of ballistics on the bullets is really going to change the out come of the trial. They could have easily omitted them and still had a rock-solid case.

Like, Baldwin is not disputing that he was holding the gun that killed her. Just that it was his fault.

HGR, that other producer. Baldwin. They can all share full guilt for what happened.

permalink
report
parent
reply
28 points

The armourer hands the actor a safe gun, the actor uses it.

If the gun isn’t safe it’s not the actor’s fault.

permalink
report
parent
reply
13 points

The issue isn’t that Baldwin held the gun, it’s that he was the producer of the entire production.

permalink
report
parent
reply
13 points

True. But that’s not how he was being charged. He was being charged because he was the actor firing the weapon. There is a difference.

If he was not a producer would we be talking about him being charged at all in this case?

If the issue is him being a producer, why aren’t all the other producers being charged for the same crime? What was different about Baldwin? If the issue isn’t that he fired the weapon.

permalink
report
parent
reply
9 points

And ultimately none of that mattered, because the issue that got the case dismissed was gross misconduct by the prosecutor.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-16 points
*

First, no. That’s wrong.

Hollywood movie industry doesn’t write law. New Mexico law says Baldwin was being negligent, and that negligence resulted in some one’s death. This is a crime.

If a lawyer tells you it’s okay to go 80 in a 55, and a cop writes you a speeding ticket, you don’t get to pull “advice of counsel” as a defense to get out of it, because the lawyers advice is obviously unreasonable and incorrect.

Alternatively, if you call a mechanic and describe some brake symptoms and he says it’s safe to get it into the shop without a tow, and you get into an accident because the brakes failed… the mechanic is not liable for that, ultimate liability rests with the driver. The mechanic didn’t know the full circumstances.

Similarly, even an idiot could be reasonably expected to recognize that it’s unsafe to point a functional firearm at people and pull the trigger (or otherwise waive it around like a toy.) therefore, an expert’s advice to the contrary is quite unreasonable and on its own face should have been ignored; and HGR was unaware of his actions with the weapon as she was not immediately present.

Therefore, Baldwin failed a duty of care to behave in a safe manner (aka he was negligent,) and some one died (homicide- probably invol. Manslaughter or whatever the specific term is.) It also goes out the window when you recognize that HGR was in fact not an expert. She was a laughably inexperienced neppo-baby and we all know it. (She was also hired because she was inexperienced and allowed things that she should not have. This benefitted the production by reducing slow downs in filming.


Now to the second point:

Baldwin did not receive the weapon from HGR- he received from an assistant producer (who plead guilty, too.)

So no. He didn’t receive it from your “expert”.

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

Doesn’t someone have to be convicted of a crime to have the law saying you’re negligent?

permalink
report
parent
reply

News

!news@lemmy.world

Create post

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil

Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.

Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.

Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.

Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.

Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.

No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.

If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.

Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.

The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body

For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

Community stats

  • 14K

    Monthly active users

  • 9K

    Posts

  • 162K

    Comments