Crime - part deux

There's been little on the actual facts of what happened and most of us assumed a set of events which may not actually be as we first thought.

I agree though, it's not clear from that clip if he's saying he didn't fire the gun, i.e. someone else did, or if he was holding it, didn't pull the trigger and it just went off.

I guess we'll know more after the full interview. I hope the interviewer grills him further on it though.

 

Short cynical answer: he's rich and famous.

Long answer: we really don't know what really happened or who is to blame. (We being the public).

Someone or someone's are to blame... Probably multiple people... But honestly this seems more of a civil case than a criminal case. No prison involved.


Of course he pulled the trigger. He would have said he hadn't when this first was announced if he hadn't. The fact that it took weeks before he decided he never pulled the trigger is a bit damning.

The reason he is saying this now is for legal defence. As I said, I bet this will be civil not criminal, so the family will be looking to sue people. Saying he didn't pull the trigger would put the blame completely on the prop and weapons people for having faulty equipment. If he admitted pulling the trigger a percentage of the blame would fall on him.

 

How come? I doubt he'd say they that if he did do it...

 

Call it the cynic in me, but that's the sort of detail that would have come out in the beginning if true.

It sounds more like a lawyer rehearsed line "say you didn't actually pull the trigger, it just went off". If he didn't pull the trigger it's the equipment's fault... Not his, so you can't sue him.

 

The first bit of legal advice he would have been given is 'shut up and say nothing until we know what's what' - I believe it was an old prop pistol that he was using, I doubt it will have been serviced and them things can go off as soon as the hammer is pulled back.

I believe something sinister has happened. I've no idea why or how a live round has made it into the chamber if it wasn't placed there by somebody with an ulterior motive...

 

Baldwin may not actually remember pulling the trigger, even if he did.
Killing someone can be very traumatic and the mind plays tricks on people.

Given the circumstances there's a decent chance it was all caught on camera.
I suspect they've got a very good idea of what happened.

 

You practically said word for word, what I was thinking about this whole scenario. Like they always say Saff, go with your gut instinct and you will normally be right, it was exactly as you've said....told to shut up and whatever happened was somebody with that ulterior motive.

 

You can take for granted his legal advice would have been to remain silent even if he mentioned to his briefs straightaway that he never pulled the trigger. I actually believe that this will end up a criminal case and not a civil matter. Somebody has placed a live round in a weapon used to kill somebody. The Police won't just overlook that.

 

Unless a complete psychopath, not sure how there could be criminal intent here. No way to know who was going to get shot... There again, it could be a psychopath out for the lolz.

 

There should have been no live ammo anywhere near the set never mind in the chamber of a gun. I fail to see what how it's ended up there without criminal intent being at the forefront.

 

I would put it down to incompetence. Never underestimate the American desire to just shoot things for no good reason.

My guess would have been "yihaa, let's go shoot some horny toads in the desert on our lunch break" and then live rounds not removed.

I wouldn't rule out homicide, but incompetence seems more likely to me.

 

Lob these 2 into a vat of acid.

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/breaking-dad-stepmum-guilty-torturing-25597056

 

Just been listening on the news, what happened to that poor 6 year old boy, at the hands of the father and girlfriend. Absolutely heart-breaking, but our sadness don't bring the poor kid back. Dreadful.

 

Snap....was just typing when you posted that, terrible story.

 

There was some suggestion when the story came out that they'd taken guns from the set to a range.
No idea if that's true, of course, but some prop guns for films are just guns that happen to be props.
They're not special in any way.

 

Just give them an hours probation every week. Locking them up is just an act of revenge and achieves nothing.

 

Looks like that may be closer to the truth...

Recalling the "marking rehearsal" - during which the cinematographer was showing him where to point the weapon - the actor said that the film's first assistant director, Dave Halls, handed him a revolver and told him "this is a cold gun" - an industry term meaning it was either empty or loaded with dummy rounds.

Ms Hutchins was instructing him on where and how to hold the weapon, "which ended up being aimed right below her armpit", he said.

Baldwin said he needed to cock the gun but not fire it in order to get the shot they needed.

"I cock the gun," he said. "I go, 'Can you see that? Can you see that? Can you see that?' And then I let go of the hammer of the gun, and the gun goes off."

 

It was fired at point blank range under her armpit.

 

Apparently there’s been plenty of live rounds found on that set. Could be a **** up by the suppliers who have been paid a visit.
Also, there was apparently much unrest in the crew over pay, and there was a threat of a walk out looming.

My gut still says this is just a tragic accident, but there’s an element of doubt that it could have been an intentional attempt to cause mayhem.

 

A sentence of 29 years minimum, to the scum woman that killed that poor little boy and the father has received 21 years, enough time to torture the fook out of these shhites, hope they get it big time inside.