• WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required. There are many reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!

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

The OSHA report is pretty damning.
No it’s not damning. It’s not flattering but definitely not damning. Unless you were the armorer. And it clearly makes no claim that Gutierrez was no longer the armorer on the day of the incident.

No matter how you cherry pick or spin the facts are clear as to what happened and where responsibilities lie
 
I sort of remember from the Armorer trial that her contract was ending but they extended it or something like that.
However, Rust also required Hannah Gutierrez-Reed to
perform the role of Props Assistant to Sarah Zachary when firearms were not in active use. In an email
conversation that occurred on October 10, 2021, Gabrielle Pickle informed Hannah Gutierrez-Reed that she
was allowed 8 paid days at the Armorer’s rate in her contract to perform Armorer tasks, and the rest of her
time was to be spent as a Props Assistant.
 
I find it interesting that Gutierrez-Reed was performing a task for which she wasn’t being paid. What does th union have to say about that?
 
I find it interesting that Gutierrez-Reed was performing a task for which she wasn’t being paid. What does th union have to say about that?
You don’t know that she wasn’t being paid as the armorer

What the union says is pay her as the armorer if she worked as the armorer.
 
You don’t know that she wasn’t being paid as the armorer

What the union says is pay her as the armorer if she worked as the armorer.
No one contradicted the OSHA report, which says her last day paid as Armorer was the 17th. Nor has anyone corrected the Wiki article.
 
No one contradicted the OSHA report, which says her last day paid as Armorer was the 17th. Nor has anyone corrected the Wiki article.
No. The OSHA report does not say that.

And if it were the case then Gutierrez would have a legitimate grievance against production and the union would get involved to settle that grievance.

What are you fishing for here? Was there anything unclear about what the judge was quoted saying?

“The judge ticked through a checklist of safety failures by Gutierrez-Reed, pointedly answering her own questions. “Did she have enough time to load the weapon safely? Plenty,” the judge said. “Did you load the weapon? Yes — with dummies and a live round. Did she check what she was loading? No.”

She was there. She was performing her duties as the armorer, she loaded the gun and declared it safe.

Those are the facts. Nothing in the OSHA report contradicts the findings by the judge which were based on Gutierrez’ own testimony!

Whether or not she got paid correctly for that day we don’t know and is not relevant. There’s no “smoking gun” there (irony intended)
 
So now we are down to bickering about who was employed and getting paid when the cases have all been decided anyway? I feel stupid even posting on this. I must have something better to do like stare blankly into the sky and breath.
 
So now we are down to bickering about who was employed and getting paid when the cases have all been decided anyway? I feel stupid even posting on this. I must have something better to do like stare blankly into the sky and breath.
I moved on some hours ago... LoL... :D
 
No, you quoted a Wikipedia account of this. Fortunately they did link the actual report. The report does not claim she was no longer the armorer
Read chapters 12 and 17 of this report and you'll see she was armorer until October 17 and props assistant thereafter. That does not mean that she did not continue to work as an armorer.
 
Read chapters 12 and 17 of this report and you'll see she was armorer until October 17 and props assistant thereafter. That does not mean that she did not continue to work as an armorer.
My point was, there were other gun mishaps on that set prior to the fatal shooting. A cameraman quit over this. There was no reasonable expectation of gun safety. The OSHA report specifically sited repeated violations of basic safety protocols.

Ironically, the cameraman quit because the director called for pointing guns at the camera.
 
Read chapters 12 and 17 of this report and you'll see she was armorer until October 17 and props assistant thereafter. That does not mean that she did not continue to work as an armorer.
I’ve read it. I don’t understand how anyone interprets it that she was not working as the armorer on the 21st
 
At best, the report is ambiguous as to her official job title on the day in question. More information is needed.
 
My point was, there were other gun mishaps on that set prior to the fatal shooting. A cameraman quit over this. There was no reasonable expectation of gun safety. The OSHA report specifically sited repeated violations of basic safety protocols.
Clearly ms Gutierrez was doing her job badly. Which does not make Alec Baldwin guilty of manslaughter
Ironically, the cameraman quit because the director called for pointing guns at the camera.
Sounds like he made a good call. But normally there would be plexiglass barriers.
 
What will be truly sad is if nothing is changed in the handling of guns on future movie sets at the end of all of this.
 
So now we are down to bickering about who was employed and getting paid when the cases have all been decided anyway? I feel stupid even posting on this. I must have something better to do like stare blankly into the sky and breath.

 
It’s not a problem.
It seems like it is, when they end up with an on set armorer who stated that "most of the time" she checked the rounds to make sure they were dummies when loading the guns and actors that have no idea how to handle the guns and treat them like toys.
 
It’s clear she came to work that day and performed the duties of armorer. Whether or not she exceeded her 6 days doesn’t matter other than how it should have affected her paycheck. The emails in the report don’t tell us how that issue was resolved
Hollywood report has a great account of what all happened: https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/movies/movie-features/rust-armorer-fair-shot-trial-1235823841/

She had hired to play two roles for them to save money. She was told on the 17th she was spending too much time being an armorer and that she should spend more time with dealing with props. On the 21st when shooting started, she was clearly in the role of Armorer:

"The prosecution will say there’s another reason Gutierrez-Reed wasn’t able to do her job properly: drugs. Prosecutors intend to introduce texts from Gutierrez-Reed’s phone that indicate she was using alcohol, marijuana and cocaine during production. On Oct. 17, the night she asked Pickle to approve more armorer days, Gutierrez-Reed was communicating with a driver on the film who asked if she was still up and if he could stay in her hotel room in Santa Fe before getting back to work in the morning. “I’m up, I’ll roll one,” Gutierrez-Reed replied. “I always gotta stay up for a bit when I get back anyways.”

In other words, she had a dual role and was informally asked to spend more time on the non-armorer task. This is way different than saying her job as Armorer had finished. No way they could keep shooting the movie if this was in fact the case with no other person playing that role.
 
Back
Top Bottom