First case involving Halyna Hutchins's death goes to trial .

I was going to post the verdict but I’ll wait to be sure AB finishes and anybody else just in case they don’t know yet ;-)
 
I am sympathetic to Guiterrez--I think she was let down by a whole lot of people in her life that led her to poor choices indirectly--including her parents IMO, and I do hope she can appeal in some way. I think her career as an armorer is probably done for as a result of this; but I hope mitigating circumstances come together for her so she serves as little time as possible--and she gets a fresh start in a still promising future. Those of you hoping to see Baldwin skewered--I think it will happen for reasons beyond just having pulled the trigger (assuming he did, which I do, but hasn't been proven). All around just a tragedy for everyone involved.
 
Her career as an armorer is over because of the felony conviction . She’s not allowed to be handling firearms anymore in that capacity as far as I can tell . As far as appeal, it’s not even worth it . I believe the max sentence is 18 months for this conviction . Meaning She will likely serve all of her time before the appeals process is over . I’m no expert in sentencing and time you actually spend in jail but It’s unlikely even if given the max sentence that she will spend the entire 18 months in jail so ……

I feel sorry for her too or have empathy or something. I’m not sure what it is or why because I really shouldn’t. . She screwed up big time, and I normally would have very little compassion for that but for some reason, I don’t know why I wish she was acquitted for some reason . I guess I’m gonna have to work that on my own .
 
Metal god said:
Her career as an armorer is over because of the felony conviction . She’s not allowed to be handling firearms anymore in that capacity as far as I can tell .
Click to expand...
She won't be allowed to touch a firearm OR ammunition in any capacity. That alone will probably make an appeal worthwhile. But, I'm not sure what grounds they have for an appeal. You can't just appeal a jury's verdict, so any appeal will have to allege some sort of procedural error.

The videos shut off the audio when the two attorneys approached the bench to discuss objections, so we have no way of knowing if the judge may have goofed on any of those. I guess we'll just have to wait and see.
 
She screwed up big time, and I normally would have very little compassion for that but for some reason, I don’t know why I wish she was acquitted for some reason . I guess I’m gonna have to work that on my own .
Click to expand...
I feel the same way. I once stuck the wrong cartridge in a rifle and fired it at the range--it fired, nothing happened and it was pointed at the target--but I stiil made the error. Not the same thing as what she was entrusted to do, but I know slip-ups can happen if you're not extra careful.
 
I think from the start there was not going to be a "Good" outcome to Hannah's case. If she got off with no consequences, IMO, that would not seem right either.
Fair? Remember Halyna was a Mom. Hannah may not ever be able to work with firearms again. I'm sympathetic to Hannah and some things don't seem "fair" for Hannah.
But what about Halyna and her kids? How fair is that? Its for the rest of their lives,too.

A big rock hit the pond and the ripples reach far.

If we accept some jobs,they come with big responsibility. Part of accepting the job is accepting the responsibility.

A Nurse might deliver meds ,an electrician tames electricity. A Friend of mine died in a housefire because the labor crew who worked on the deck out back left a pile of deck oil stain rags against the house.

I've machined parts that went in applications from submarines to aircraft to a Caterpillar engine that might be in a crab fishing boat. Or the engine that fires up to run the sprinkler system in a tall building in case of fire.
I kept in mind lives depended on the job I did. Like your Gunsmith,or the Guy at Boeing who attaches hatch doors.

And I spent some time as a school custodian. Cleaning the rest rooms,drinking fountains,etc I recognized I was responsible for the kids.

Anyone in the food prep business has responsibilities.

Sometimes we have to say "No, I'm, not doing that. " Even if the boss will throw a tantrum.

Back to the group pheasant hunt, If Elmer Fudd has his shotgun over his shoulder and his muzzle is sweeping everyone behind him, ....No need to loudly call him out. But we CAN approach him quietly and whisper "Hey,Fuddzy...you may not be aware,but ...."

We ALL have a responsibility ,

To speak up and confront a Baldwin might have saved a life.

How many RUST cast and crew share responsibility ?

Next time you get the chance,do the right thing.
 
There is no question that she, and several others, were negligent. A jury has decided her negligence met the standard for criminal negligence, a death resulted from that negligence and convicted her of manslaughter.

The forms were followed, the process was run, and we have a result in the form of a jury verdict. Whether or not you or I think it was the right verdict, or a fair verdict does not matter. Justice, under our legal system, was done.

I'm sure Baldwin's defense team will try and use the conviction to argue how Baldwin wasn't responsible for the shooting. I don't buy that, and I hope his jury won't either.
 
Baldwin can be abusive and domineering.
In a supportive environment, that encourages safety, Hannah may have been able to do ok....but she did have some problems....like "partying".

Revisit the scene where Baldwin comes through the door guns blazing,then he's down.
He rises up some, starts shouting orders while using the gun for a pointer.

He wants to do the scene over, He wants a reload NOW!! Hurry Hurry!

Seems like a "Hostile Environment" Management is hostile to taking the time to follow SAG safety guidelines.

An LEO or Combat Veteran ,or MMA fighter at 24 years old might have the confidence to go full R. Lee Emerey Gunny nose to nose with Baldwin ,

But I don't think Hannah would do that. If that is the requirement, Hannah was not the right hire.

But then, neither was Baldwin.

At least not in a Leadership/ Management role.

We have too many Managers and too few LEADERS
 
Unfortunately

One of the concepts I live my life by, that is not what is going to occur in this case when IMO the real bad guy goes to trial.
The buck stops here. That's Baldwin. Whether or not he pulled the trigger (he did) actors do not check weapons like we check weapons. They do not handle weapons like we handle weapons, they point guns at people, on purpose when the script calls for it.
The walk outs over safety will do him no favors, and rightfully so.
Baldwin fully allowed the poor environment to develop over months, why nothing mentioned with regard to the recreational plinking after hours?
Hannah has responsibility here as well, there is plenty to go around. Her ultimate boss is the real bad guy.
Let's try the correct individual for the death, for the reasons she died which was not that Baldwin pulled the trigger, he had to. It's how the live round found it's way to that Pietta SAA clone.
 
for the reasons she died which was not that Baldwin pulled the trigger, he had to. It's how the live round found it's way to that Pietta SAA clone.
Click to expand...

I am going to dispute this, slightly...

The live round getting into the gun is the primary contributing factor. And, if it had been absent then no one would have been shot, this is true.

But the live round was what did the work, not the reason she died. She died because Baldwin shot her.

This was not a case of an actor pointing a gun and "firing" it at a cast member because the script called for it. This was Baldwin screwing around, pointing a gun at a crewmember (NOT an actor on the set) cocking the gun and whether he remembers doing it or not, he must have pulled the trigger.

OF course he thought the gun was harmless, he had been told so, but he just assumed it was because he was told it was and he KNEW proper procedure had not been followed.

Much has been said about how actors aren't expected to be firearms experts, and not required to be. But what they are expected to be is experts at their own jobs, and I've been watching Baldwin use guns in the movies for over 30 years.

He HAD to have known that the proper protocols had not been followed, and he didn't care. He got what he wanted, when he wanted, he was the boss and following the rules wasn't done if it got in the way of what he wanted and wanted "right now!". And "everything was fine" until his cinematographer got shot...

Its not the actor's "job" to point guns and pretend to shoot the crew members. It is part of the actor's job to witness the gun to be used being loaded, so that they know it IS loaded, and what it is loaded with. Baldwin did neither.
 
Can anyone point out/follow the trail of
- Who physically loaded the gun;
- When it was loaded;
- Where it was kept after it was loaded;
- How it wound up in the Ass't Dir's hands when he gave it to Baldwin?

I've heard too many versions.
 
Nope, and for me, that's what makes this something juries decide. It's hard to follow; hard to figure out. So, you argue it the best you can and let a group of 12 decide what happened.
 
- Who physically loaded the gun;
- When it was loaded;
- Where it was kept after it was loaded;
- How it wound up in the Ass't Dir's hands when he gave it to Baldwin?
Click to expand...

Hanna loaded the gun , there was testimony Hanna specifically pointed out which box of dummy rounds she loaded the gun from . That box of dummy rounds contained at least one live round still in the box when investigators examined it after the shooting. That was a big moment in the trial for me .

Hanna handed that loaded gun to the AD outside the church and told him it was cold . I don’t recall if she loaded it in front of the AD or brought it to him already loaded . There was no dispute who loaded the gun .

The AD brought the gun into the church and handed it to the actor ( Baldwin) and told him it was a cold gun .
 
Metal god said:
Hanna loaded the gun , there was testimony Hanna specifically pointed out which box of dummy rounds she loaded the gun from . That box of dummy rounds contained at least one live round still in the box when investigators examined it after the shooting. That was a big moment in the trial for me .

Hanna handed that loaded gun to the AD outside the church and told him it was cold . I don’t recall if she loaded it in front of the AD or brought it to him already loaded . There was no dispute who loaded the gun .

The AD brought the gun into the church and handed it to the actor ( Baldwin) and told him it was a cold gun .
Click to expand...
Assuming all that is true and correct, I would say that Hannah and Halls should be considered equally guilty -- and possibly Halls more so that Gutierrez. The First Assistant Director is supposed to be THE top guy for safety on the set. Halls had been in the industry for 30 years. He knew that the protocol is for the armorer to load any firearm in front of the 1AD, physically shaking each round so they can BOTH hear the BB rattle inside. So even if Gutierrez loaded the gun, Halls should not have accepted it from her without insisting on verifying that the dummies were in fact dummies. And he certainly should not have handed the gun to anyone else, OR called out "cold gun," without having performed that safety check.

Not only that -- they weren't filming. They were blocking out the scene. Which means there was no need to have dummy rounds in the chambers at all. Blocking out the scene could -- and should -- have been done using a rubber replica revolver but, even if Baldwin had insisted on having the real thing because reasons ... there was still no reason to have anything in the chambers, and the industry guidelines seem to say that there should not have been anything in the chambers.
 
Metal god said:
Likely why he took the deal and testified against Hanna
Click to expand...
Of course. And I'm sure that's why Sarah Zachry cut an immunity deal and agreed to testify against Gutierrez.

All in all, I think I agree with Gutierrez's lawyer's statement from his closing argument. Basically, he said the fix was in. They had a dead woman and they needed someone to be the scapegoat. Hannah Gutierrez-Reed was the chosen sacrificial lamb. Everybody else lined up to pin all the blame on her. I didn't believe much of anything Seth Kenny said. Sarah Zachry was his employee and, whether or not he told her to do it, she tampered with evidence and discarded rounds from the gun (or from the prop cart -- I can't keep all the stories straight and I'm not sure it matters -- she tampered with evidence) and was allowed to walk away, as free as a bird.

And that beast of a productions person -- Pickles, I think her name was -- testifying that production suggested she initiate a sign-out/sign-in system for the firearms, and the prosecution portraying that as "help." Let's think about the logistics of that for a moment. There were reportedly thirty firearms on the set. The only way a sign-out/sign-in system makes any sense at all is if you track each firearm by at least make, type, and serial number. I think a realistic estimate of how long it would take to retrieve a gun from a safe, check it's serial number, and have an actor sign for it would probably average at least a minute for each gun but to be generous, assume it could be done in half that. That's fifteen minutes at the start of each day's action, another fifteen minutes to log them all back in at lunch break, yet another fifteen minutes to hand them out after lunch, and yet another fifteen minutes at the end of each day. That's a full hour, and if it takes a minute per gun times fur transactions per day it's TWO hours per day. This was a budget production being run on a shoestring budget -- there]s no way Baldwin and the other producers would have allowed one to two hours per day to be chewed up by distributing guns and checking them back in by serial number.

And that time estimate doesn't even touch on trying to keep track of ammunition.

There were reports early on that Gutierrez initially thought she wasn't experienced enough to take this job. Sadly, it appears that she was correct. She should not have taken the job.
 
They had a dead woman and they needed someone to be the scapegoat. Hannah Gutierrez-Reed was the chosen sacrificial lamb.
Click to expand...

This is essentially my take on it. There are targets that are at least equally, if not more, culpable in this episode... but Guitierrez is the 24 year old low hanging fruit. I see her conviction also severely impeding any conviction of Baldwin, who will show up with a serious legal team that continually reminds the jury that Guitierrez was been found to be responsible for this young lady's death by a jury. Not saying its sure to work, but I think it's sure to help.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top