Verdict reached. To be announced soon. Just 2.5 hours.
Alec Baldwin may be in some hot water
222,579 Views |
1683 Replies |
Last: 6 mo ago by Urban Ag
She's toast.AtticusMatlock said:
Verdict reached. To be announced soon. Just 2.5 hours.
I missed most of the trial but watched the defense gun "expert" wave the gun around the room yesterday and accidentally point it at the judge before he even demonstrated it was unloaded. Pretty sure I saw the defense attorney's spirit leave his body.
I watched nearly all of it. And yes, that witness doing that was a true WTF moment. Now in his defense, he had previously testified that the gun he was holding was a completely non functioning replica, not a rubber ducky but right next to it.AtticusMatlock said:
I missed most of the trial but watched the defense gun "expert" wave the gun around the room yesterday and accidentally point it at the judge before he even demonstrated it was unloaded. Pretty sure I saw the defense attorney's spirit leave his body.
I feel a little bit badly for Ms. Gutierrez-Reed. If Alec Baldwin were not involved in this case, which made it political, I don't think she would ever have been prosecuted.aggiehawg said:She's toast.AtticusMatlock said:
Verdict reached. To be announced soon. Just 2.5 hours.
The girl is collateral damage to his political activism.
And before even reaching this third paragraph, someone was already typing "what about feeling bad for Halima Hutchins?" Yes, I obviously feel badly for her and her family, too. This was a tragic accident.
Foreperson sounds like woman in her 30s.
Guilty on count one, involuntary manslaughter.
Not guilty of evidence tampering.
No surprises here IMO. The Baldwin case will be a lot of fun to watch. He'll have way better attorneys.
Guilty on count one, involuntary manslaughter.
Not guilty of evidence tampering.
No surprises here IMO. The Baldwin case will be a lot of fun to watch. He'll have way better attorneys.
I kind of feel sorry for her then again, she was incompetent to do that job. Cheap ass production, rushed filming schedule, loosely run set, and she was cheap. Negligent hiring in my book.
She's being remanded. She's been out on bond during pretrial with no issues.
How do you mean that if Alec wasn't involved she wouldn't be charged? I don't follow.
there is absolutely no reason for that. That girl is not a flight risk, and there is no reason to stick her in jail before sentencing. Hell, I would be surprised if she gets anything more than probation.AtticusMatlock said:
She's being remanded. She's been out on bond during pretrial with no issues.
Yeah that does suck, very surprising. Unless the judge is leaning towards a time served sentence?AtticusMatlock said:
She's being remanded. She's been out on bond during pretrial with no issues.
I will add that trying Hannah first works to protect Baldwin in his upcoming trial. He can point the finger at her repeatedly and he will likely be able to take the stand and audition for an Academy Award with his histrionics on the stand.Antoninus said:The seething hatred that the right wing media has for Alec Baldwin put a lot of pressure on that office to bring charges.BadMoonRisin said:
How do you mean that if Alec wasn't involved she wouldn't be charged? I don't follow.
If Baldwin were not involved, I think that the prosecutors office would've treated this as the tragic accident that it was. I do not think they would've prosecuted anyone.
if I were representing him, that is certainly how I would play itaggiehawg said:I will add that trying Hannah first works to protect Baldwin in his upcoming trial. He can point the finger at her repeatedly and he will likely be able to take the stand and audition for an Academy Award with his histrionics on the stand.Antoninus said:
The seething hatred that the right wing media has for Alec Baldwin put a lot of pressure on that office to bring charges. They probably had to higher extra staff just to handle the hate mail they were receiving
If Baldwin were not involved, I think that the prosecutors office would've treated this as the tragic accident that it was. I do not think they would've prosecuted anyone.
Of course. Most defense lawyers would, not to mention the high dollar criminal defense attorneys Baldwin has.Antoninus said:if I were representing him, that is certainly how I would play itaggiehawg said:I will add that trying Hannah first works to protect Baldwin in his upcoming trial. He can point the finger at her repeatedly and he will likely be able to take the stand and audition for an Academy Award with his histrionics on the stand.Antoninus said:
The seething hatred that the right wing media has for Alec Baldwin put a lot of pressure on that office to bring charges. They probably had to higher extra staff just to handle the hate mail they were receiving
If Baldwin were not involved, I think that the prosecutors office would've treated this as the tragic accident that it was. I do not think they would've prosecuted anyone.
I think Baldwin is toast.
I don't. There were jury instructions here about intervening causes of death. Roughly speaking, a but/for argument (that's a simplication, over simplication) as applied here.AtticusMatlock said:
I think Baldwin is toast.
But for the armorer's negligent actions, when Baldwin did the cross draw that day, nothing would have happened and Halyna would still be alive. IOW, the intervening event occurred before Baldwin even was involved.
What Baldwin's counsel will have a problem with is the AD Halls testimony. Since it kept changing throughout this whole time.
VERY unlikely.AtticusMatlock said:
I think Baldwin is toast.
I thought it unlikely BEFORE the Gutierrez conviction. It is even less likely now.
I agree. He'll walk. Assuming he doesn't take a minor misdemeanor plea in the meantime. In hinsight, Assistant Director Halls' attorneys were very shrewd. He kept his mouth shut, they pleaded him out to misdmenaor with 6 months probation only and he's free, completely.Antoninus said:VERY unlikely.AtticusMatlock said:
I think Baldwin is toast.
I thought it unlikely BEFORE the Gutierrez conviction. It is even less likely now.
Baldwin couldn't shut the hell up and kept giving alternate explanations of how proficient he was with guns, then a bumbling idiot who did not understand how a single action revolver works.
At trial, Sara Zachary, Hannah's assistant armorer testified that a single action revolver can only be loaded/unloaded is when your thumb has the hammer fully cocked back and the trigger pulled at the same time.
WTH?
Antoninus said:The seething hatred that the right wing media has for Alec Baldwin put a lot of pressure on that office to bring chargesBadMoonRisin said:
How do you mean that if Alec wasn't involved she wouldn't be charged? I don't follow.
Are you insane?
This is Santa Fe. The extremely blue capital of a blue state with a Dem governor. I'm surprised they didn't nominate Baldwin for Sainthood and indict the corpse of Rush Limbaugh.
Santa Fe is the only place I ever heard LEFT wing talk radio
Never thought they would actually indict him to begin with but that NM OSHA report was scathing.CanyonAg77 said:Antoninus said:The seething hatred that the right wing media has for Alec Baldwin put a lot of pressure on that office to bring chargesBadMoonRisin said:
How do you mean that if Alec wasn't involved she wouldn't be charged? I don't follow.
Are you insane?
This is Santa Fe. The extremely blue capital of a blue state with a Dem governor. I'm surprised they didn't nominate Baldwin for Sainthood and indict the corpse of Rush Limbaugh.
Santa Fe is the only place I ever heard LEFT wing talk radio
To be clear here, OSHA's job is workplace safety meaning they look solely at employers and theirsafety protocols both as written and as implemented. They don't prosecute individual people, they fine companies, employers. Baldwin as an Exec Producer, is the employer. The company was fined because the movie set was unsafe. Moving on..........
Will the jury in Baldwin's case even care? Better yet will they even see that OSHA report?
yep, the little people go to prisonAntoninus said:I feel a little bit badly for Ms. Gutierrez-Reed. If Alec Baldwin were not involved in this case, which made it political, I don't think she would ever have been prosecuted.aggiehawg said:She's toast.AtticusMatlock said:
Verdict reached. To be announced soon. Just 2.5 hours.
The girl is collateral damage to his political activism.
And before even reaching this third paragraph, someone was already typing "what about feeling bad for Halima Hutchins?" Yes, I obviously feel badly for her and her family, too. This was a tragic accident.
the celebrity...stay tuned
Did not work out for Leona Helmsley well.W said:yep, the little people go to prisonAntoninus said:I feel a little bit badly for Ms. Gutierrez-Reed. If Alec Baldwin were not involved in this case, which made it political, I don't think she would ever have been prosecuted.aggiehawg said:She's toast.AtticusMatlock said:
Verdict reached. To be announced soon. Just 2.5 hours.
The girl is collateral damage to his political activism.
And before even reaching this third paragraph, someone was already typing "what about feeling bad for Halima Hutchins?" Yes, I obviously feel badly for her and her family, too. This was a tragic accident.
the celebrity...stay tuned
Oh yeah...forgot about that. So, he's responsible for the armorer being hired AND continuing to be employed even though all those people testified that there were major problems.aggiehawg said:Never thought they would actually indict him to begin with but that NM OSHA report was scathing.CanyonAg77 said:Antoninus said:The seething hatred that the right wing media has for Alec Baldwin put a lot of pressure on that office to bring chargesBadMoonRisin said:
How do you mean that if Alec wasn't involved she wouldn't be charged? I don't follow.
Are you insane?
This is Santa Fe. The extremely blue capital of a blue state with a Dem governor. I'm surprised they didn't nominate Baldwin for Sainthood and indict the corpse of Rush Limbaugh.
Santa Fe is the only place I ever heard LEFT wing talk radio
To be clear here, OSHA's job is workplace safety meaning they look solely at employers and theirsafety protocols both as written and as implemented. They don't prosecute individual people, they fine companies, employers. Baldwin as an Exec Producer, is the employer. The company was fined because the movie set was unsafe. Moving on..........
Will the jury in Baldwin's case even care? Better yet will they even see that OSHA report?
If he was just an actor who was handed a gun that he thought was empty, I'd agree that he really shouldn't be culpable for anything - he was essentially told the gun was safe and trusted the person in charge of the gun. He may be a d-bag, but that doesn't mean he needs to be charged with a crime.
HOWEVER...since he was the BOSS of the person in charge of the gun, AND there were numerous examples of piss poor safety protocols on the set, maybe he IS culpable...HE is the one that allowed an unqualified person to be in charge of the guns, thus creating an unsafe environment on the set.
As you said earlier, "but/for"...But for Baldwin's negligence in allowing an unqualified person to be in charge of the weapons on the set, this accident would not have occurred.
i'm interested to find out exactly what that means in this case, and we haven't really been told as yet. Presumably, that will come out during the trial.aggiehawg said:
Baldwin as an Exec Producer, is the employer.
Apparently, that title can meaning anything from someone with great authority to someone who was given a title in lieu of money (a little like Woody being named "senior bartender" at Cheers, in lieu of a raise.
as we can see in the the immediately preceding post, people tend to just assume the former, but it is my understanding that the latter is much more common.
As much as I despise Baldwin's politics, and enjoy the schadenfreude of an anti-gun nut getting convicted of a gun crime, this is 95% on the armorer. One should expect an actor to be stupid and the producers are responsible for safety
EDIT: Ag With Kids covered the exception above. If Baldwin is producer, he's responsible for the armorer
EDIT: Ag With Kids covered the exception above. If Baldwin is producer, he's responsible for the armorer
Which was Baldwin.Quote:
One should expect an actor to be stupid and the producers are responsible for safety
You have now reached a whole new level of... will call it avoidance of the evidence.Quote:
Apparently, that title can meaning anything from someone with great authority to someone who was given a title in lieu of money (a little like Woody being named "senior bartender" at Cheers, in lieu of a raise.
Shameful.
I was taking the presumption from hawg's post.Antoninus said:i'm interested to find out exactly what that means in this case, and we haven't really been told as yet. Presumably, that will come out during the trial.aggiehawg said:
Baldwin as an Exec Producer, is the employer.
Apparently, that title can meaning anything from someone with great authority to someone who was given a title in lieu of money (a little like Woody being named "senior bartender" at Cheers, in lieu of a raise.
as we can see in the the immediately preceding post, people tend to just assume the former, but it is my understanding that the latter is much more common.
If it's just a meaningless title meant to stroke his ego and fill up his bank account, but with no actual responsibility, then I go back to my other position...
However, if he WAS exerting some type of executive control over the production, though not as the hiring and firing boss, it's an interesting grey area...
Agreed. His potential vicarious liability in a civil case, will turn largely on that issue.
but not in this case. That is not the basis of the indictment against him
but not in this case. That is not the basis of the indictment against him
Hawg, back at the time of the shooting, when I saw that he was listed as a producer, I searched everywhere to try to determine exactly what his responsibilities were. I did fairly extensive research as to exactly what a "producer" means. I found what I listed above.aggiehawg said:You have now reached a whole new level of... will call it avoidance of the evidence.Quote:
Apparently, that title can meaning anything from someone with great authority to someone who was given a title in lieu of money (a little like Woody being named "senior bartender" at Cheers, in lieu of a raise.
Shameful.
If you have more information specific to this case, which tells us exactly what his level of authority might've been, please provide it.
But don't just say "he was a producer" and pretend that it automatically means something. You said above that you had worked on a movie set, so you know better, and it makes you look like one of these yahoos who is incapable of doing any analysis deeper than the first layer.
Maybe someday you will understand how Hollywood works on very low budget films.Antoninus said:Hawg, back at the time of the shooting, when I saw that he was listed as a producer, I searched everywhere to try to determine exactly what his responsibilities were. I did fairly extensive research as to exactly what a "producer" means. I found what I listed above.aggiehawg said:You have now reached a whole new level of... will call it avoidance of the evidence.Quote:
Apparently, that title can meaning anything from someone with great authority to someone who was given a title in lieu of money (a little like Woody being named "senior bartender" at Cheers, in lieu of a raise.
Shameful.
If you have more information specific to this case, which tells us exactly what his level of authority might've been, please provide it.
But don't just say "he was a producer" and pretend that it automatically means something. You said above that you had worked on a movie set, so you know better, and it makes you look like one of these yahoos who is incapable of doing any analysis deeper than the first layer.
Dont' blame me for shortcuts your God and Savior, Alec Balwin did .
Pfft.
my understanding is that "low budget films" are the films most likely to hand out meaningless titles rather than dollars.
Again, if you have information regarding this film and the nature of Baldwin's responsibilities, please be forthcoming. If you have something to teach, I actually want to learn. Stop being cryptic. it is not gnomic. It is just mildly annoying
Again, if you have information regarding this film and the nature of Baldwin's responsibilities, please be forthcoming. If you have something to teach, I actually want to learn. Stop being cryptic. it is not gnomic. It is just mildly annoying
If you run over someone with your car speeding that's a tragic accident too but you still have to pay for it unless you could prove it was unpreventable, which this was preventable.
They did cause the death of this woman.
That's involuntary manslaughter. Your negligence caused the death of someone. It doesn't mean if they planned it or weren't careless.
And I think she would've been convicted without Baldwin, probably much faster.
They did cause the death of this woman.
That's involuntary manslaughter. Your negligence caused the death of someone. It doesn't mean if they planned it or weren't careless.
And I think she would've been convicted without Baldwin, probably much faster.
I avoid temptation unless I can’t resist it.
Annie, I have a serious question for you.
Do you have any interest whatsoever in walking through the elements of manslaughter under New Mexico law, so that you would understand why you are wrong on both the elements and the burden of proof?
Or have you convinced yourself that you're absolutely correct, making that an utter waste of time?
You seem like a nice enough person, and if you actually want to learn, I'm willing to help. But if you're just going to bow-up and call me a "Lib" for trying to help you understand the plain language of a statute, I really have no interest.
Do you have any interest whatsoever in walking through the elements of manslaughter under New Mexico law, so that you would understand why you are wrong on both the elements and the burden of proof?
Or have you convinced yourself that you're absolutely correct, making that an utter waste of time?
You seem like a nice enough person, and if you actually want to learn, I'm willing to help. But if you're just going to bow-up and call me a "Lib" for trying to help you understand the plain language of a statute, I really have no interest.
Featured Stories
See All
FINAL from Blue Bell Park: No. 10 Texas A&M 10, Houston 2
by Richard Zane
7:33
6h ago
1.2k
Take Five: Jordan Lockhart's go-to spots, favorite movies & more
by Richard Zane
60:48
4h ago
1.2k
B-Team: Lone Star Showdown look back, answering baseball questions & more
by Ryan Brauninger