Alec Baldwin shooting: Lawyer suggests potential sabotage on ‘Rust’ set.

[Duke]

It’s very simple. If the gun has a “hair trigger” it is entirely possible for someone to activate it without deliberately pulling the trigger

Also, IF Baldwin was trying to execute a draw with some speed, then he MAY have mistakenly or inadvertently used his trigger finger to assist in gripping the revolver, because it's harder to get a fast and secure grip with just your other four fingers and thumb.

If he WAS using his trigger finger to help grip the the revolver, and if he thumbed back the hammer WHILE the trigger was pressed, the hammer would have dropped and the firearm would have discharged the instant his thumb came off the hammer.

If he was practicing cross-draw at the time (as indicated in some reports), this not only complicates quickly getting that initial grip but also results in the muzzle potentially swinging across a large horizontal arc during the draw, with an accidental discharge potentially occurring anywhere along that arc.

I remember being taught by a retired Marine Corps firearms instructor, who happened to be the man who raised me, that single-action revolvers have a considerably higher incidence of accidental discharge than either double-action revolvers or semi-automatic pistols. Especially when someone attempts a quick draw - that's when a rather critical sequence of events can be disrupted.

(Imo NONE of the above addresses the central issue, which is that Baldwin was handed a pistol which he had every reason to believe was safe for him to use, and obviously such was not the case because multiple protocols which have been in place and working effectively for decades had been violated.)

 

[Timcognito]

Also, IF Baldwin was trying to execute the draw with some speed, then he MAY have mistakenly or inadvertently used his trigger finger to assist in gripping the revolver, because it's harder to get a fast and secure grip with just your other four fingers and thumb.

If he WAS using his trigger finger to help grip the the revolver, and if he then thumbed back the hammer WHILE the trigger was pressed, the hammer would have dropped and the firearm would have discharged the instant his thumb came off the hammer.

If he was practicing cross-draw at the time (as indicated in some reports), this not only complicates quickly getting that initial grip but also results in the muzzle potentially swinging across a large horizontal arc during the draw, with an accidental discharge potentially occurring anywhere along that arc.

I remember being taught by a retired Marine Corps firearms instructor, who happened to be the man who raised me, that single-action revolvers have a considerably higher incidence of accidental discharge than either double-action revolvers or semi-automatic pistols.

(Imo NONE of the above addresses the central issue, which is that Baldwin was handed a pistol which he had every reason to believe was safe for him to use, and obviously such was not the case because multiple protocols which have been in place and working effectively for decades had been violated.)

And he should not have not pointed it at anyone especially at a rehearsal or even in actual scene, because without the perfect camera angle it's impossible to tell if it's slightly off. But I agree safety protocols should suspend all shootings, even accidents.

 

[Petrushka]

Also, IF Baldwin was trying to execute a draw with some speed, then he MAY have mistakenly or inadvertently used his trigger finger to assist in gripping the revolver, because it's harder to get a fast and secure grip with just your other four fingers and thumb.

If he WAS using his trigger finger to help grip the the revolver, and if he thumbed back the hammer WHILE the trigger was pressed, the hammer would have dropped and the firearm would have discharged the instant his thumb came off the hammer.

If he was practicing cross-draw at the time (as indicated in some reports), this not only complicates quickly getting that initial grip but also results in the muzzle potentially swinging across a large horizontal arc during the draw, with an accidental discharge potentially occurring anywhere along that arc.

I remember being taught by a retired Marine Corps firearms instructor, who happened to be the man who raised me, that single-action revolvers have a considerably higher incidence of accidental discharge than either double-action revolvers or semi-automatic pistols.

(Imo NONE of the above addresses the central issue, which is that Baldwin was handed a pistol which he had every reason to believe was safe for him to use, and obviously such was not the case because multiple protocols which have been in place and working effectively for decades had been violated.)

Those protocols need to be updated to conform to the law, and the law speaks only to the person holding the gun.

 

[Blumlein 88]

This revolver could fire if dropped while the hammer was released. It didn't have a transfer safety bar like modern designs. It was made so the hammer could be in quarter or half cocked position so it was safe if dropped. The FBI tested these positions by hitting with a mallet to see if the hammer would slip and fire. It did not. It did fire when tapped in fully released position. Then while mallet testing fully cocked it didn't fire but in time they broke parts of the trigger mechanism. They concluded it only fired in two ways. If cocked and then trigger pulled. Or if trigger was held down while hammer was fully cocked and released (like fanning the hammer for rapid fire).

 

[Sal1950]

(Imo NONE of the above addresses the central issue, which is that Baldwin was handed a pistol which he had every reason to believe was safe for him to use, and obviously such was not the case because multiple protocols which have been in place and working effectively for decades had been violated.)

That is the bottom line.

The second is that a dangerous weapon was handed to a snowflake movie actor.
I don't think I'd let him handle a butter knife without proper supervision. LOL

 

[Sal1950]

Those protocols need to be updated to conform to the law, and the law speaks only to the person holding the gun.

Yea you would think, but unfortunately you just can't fix stupid.

 

[Petrushka]

Yea you would think, but unfortunately you just can't fix stupid.

20 years with no accidents, then you have one tiny little wafer thin death, and all of a sudden you are evil.

 

[Sal1950]

20 years with no accidents, then you have one tiny little wafer thin death, and all of a sudden you are evil.

LOL

 

[Justdafactsmaam]

Those protocols need to be updated to conform to the law, and the law speaks only to the person holding the gun.

You have been asked a dozen times to cite the law. Please cite the law!

And do you really think after the death of Brandon Lee that all the experts consulted by the two unions and the producers all collectively overlooked state and federal laws?

How did we ever make any movies without killing half the crew having not checked with you first?

 

[Justdafactsmaam]

20 years with no accidents, then you have one tiny little wafer thin death, and all of a sudden you are evil.

As opposed to about 10,000 accidental deaths using cardinal rules of safety that you advocate.

I’ll take one please over 10K

 

[Justdafactsmaam]

“Deliberately”.

I know personally of two instances of someone accidentally pulling the trigger. A hair trigger does not pull itself, even if the gun is dropped.

And no doubt reality revolves around your personal experiences

 

[Ron Party]

Baldwin settled. There could be other civil suits. Yes or no?

The original wrongful death action filed by Brian Panish o/b/o the Hutchins estate remains pending, at least in part due to the fact that the settlement has not been fully funded. (As an aside, I give a lot of credit to whoever made the decision to hire Panish. I associated his firm in on a case I was handling maybe half a dozen years back. IMO he is the number 1 PI attorney in California and by a country mile.) From what little I know, the estate may be seeking to undo the settlement and march on with the case.

Hutchins parents and sister filed their own action as well and IIRC that action remains pending as well.

 

[Petrushka]

You have been asked a dozen times to cite the law. Please cite the law!

And do you really think after the death of Brandon Lee that all the experts consulted by the two unions and the producers all collectively overlooked state and federal laws?

How did we ever make any movies without killing half the crew having not checked with you first?

I quoted the law. The law requires due caution when dealing with objects known to be hazardous. That is what the jury would have decided. The law is generalized. No specific requirement to check cartridges.

I suspect most movies hire tech crews that are not incompetent, and if they hire a beginner, they are supervised by an adult. We already know that the armorer was a neophyte. The question is, why was this person trusted. Especially after violating common practice regarding live rounds.

And there is still the open question of why some crew members quit over safety practices.

 

[Petrushka]

And no doubt reality revolves around your personal experiences

Unless you can demonstrate that no one has ever pulled a trigger unintentionally, my experience would be enough to justify the trigger rule. But my experience is common, and yes, reality is comprised of repeated experiences.

 

[Justdafactsmaam]

I quoted the law.

Where

The law requires due caution when dealing with objects known to be hazardous.

I’d like to see the law, not your interpretation of it

That is what the jury would have decided. The law is generalized. No specific requirement to check cartridges.

Can we see the actual law please?

I suspect most movies hire tech crews that are not incompetent, and if they hire a beginner, they are supervised by an adult. We already know that the armorer was a neophyte. The question is, why was this person trusted. Especially after violating common practice regarding live rounds.

And there is still the open question of why some crew members quit over safety practices.

All fair questions

 

[Blumlein 88]

Prosecutor who resigned from Alec Baldwin 'Rust' case says she wanted dismissal

Erlinda Ocampo Johnson said she believed in the manslaughter case against Alec Baldwin, but that withheld evidence meant the case should be dismissed.

www.nbcnews.com

 

[Justdafactsmaam]

Unless you can demonstrate that no one has ever pulled a trigger unintentionally, my experience would be enough to justify the trigger rule. But my experience is common, and yes, reality is comprised of repeated experiences.

Wrong. The reality of accidentally pulling a trigger does not depend on my ability to demonstrate it. Just as it is not limited to your personal experiences

We are boarding on creationist type arguments. “If I haven’t seen a monkey turn into a human and you can show me a monkey turning into a human evolution is bull.”

 

[Petrushka]

Where

I’d like to see the law, not your interpretation of it

Can we see the actual law please?

All fair questions

Manslaughter in Arizona (A.R.S §13-1103) | DM Cantor

In Arizona per A.R.S §13-1103 a person can be charged with “Manslaughter” by:“Recklessly” causing the death of another;“Intentionally” or “knowingly” killing a person in the heat of passion or upon a sudden quarrel resulting from adequate provocation from the victim; "Intentionally" aiding...

dmcantor.com

To “recklessly” cause the death of another, means that the person was unaware of and consciously disregarded a substantial and unjustifiable risk that a result would occur, or that the circumstances existed. The risks must be of such a nature and degree that disregard of such risks constitutes a gross deviation from the standard of conduct that a reasonable person would observe in the situation. People are sometimes charged if they are recklessly handling a firearm which accidentally discharges and kills someone,

 

[Duke]

Where

I’d like to see the law, not your interpretation of it

Can we see the actual law please?

I found this online, on what appears to be a page on the Arizona Legislature website (https://www.azleg.gov/ars/13/01103.htm):

13-1103. Manslaughter; classification

A. A person commits manslaughter by doing any of the following:

1. Recklessly causing the death of another person.

2. Committing second degree murder as prescribed in section 13-1104, subsection A on a sudden quarrel or heat of passion resulting from adequate provocation by the victim.

3. Intentionally providing the physical means that another person uses to die by suicide, with the knowledge that the person intends to die by suicide.

4. Committing second degree murder as prescribed in section 13-1104, subsection A, paragraph 3, while being coerced to do so by the use or threatened immediate use of unlawful deadly physical force on the person or a third person that a reasonable person in his situation would have been unable to resist.

5. Knowingly or recklessly causing the death of an unborn child by any physical injury to the mother.

B. A person who is at least eighteen years of age commits manslaughter by intentionally providing advice or encouragement that a minor uses to die by suicide with the knowledge that the minor intends to die by suicide.

C. An offense under subsection A, paragraph 5 of this section applies to an unborn child in the womb at any stage of its development. A person shall not be prosecuted under subsection A, paragraph 5 of this section if any of the following applies:

1. The person was performing an abortion for which the consent of the pregnant woman, or a person authorized by law to act on the pregnant woman's behalf, has been obtained or for which the consent was implied or authorized by law.

2. The person was performing medical treatment on the pregnant woman or the pregnant woman's unborn child.

3. The person was the unborn child's mother.

D. Manslaughter is a class 2 felony.

I'm not an attorney, but it seems to me that the only potentially applicable definition of manslaughter is this: "Recklessly causing the death of another person."

 

[Justdafactsmaam]

Manslaughter in Arizona (A.R.S §13-1103) | DM Cantor

In Arizona per A.R.S §13-1103 a person can be charged with “Manslaughter” by:“Recklessly” causing the death of another;“Intentionally” or “knowingly” killing a person in the heat of passion or upon a sudden quarrel resulting from adequate provocation from the victim; "Intentionally" aiding...

dmcantor.com

So it says nothing about pointing a gun. Nothing.