
<p>Ever since the deadly shooting on the set of Alec Baldwin’s movie “Rust,” the speculation has been running high as to whether the actor would be charged with a crime in conjunction with the death of cinematographer Halyna Hutchins – or would he walk.</p>



<p>To refresh the memory of the event, Baldwin was handed a gun that he was told was safe (loaded with a blank).  ; In an unofficial rehearsal, Baldwin aimed the gun directly at Hutchins. ; The gun went off, hitting her in the chest. ; The bullet passed through her body and wounded Director Joel Souza. ; No charges were filed against Souza even though he could have been charged based on his overarching responsibilities on the set.</p>



<p>Thems the facts, folks. ; And now for the nuances and debatable “facts.”.</p>



<p>Baldwin claimed that he never pulled the trigger – and only pulled back the hammer. ; Ballistic tests by experts determined that the gun could not fire unless the trigger was pulled.</p>



<p>Since then, most pundits and observers said that Baldwin would not be charged. ; He was told the gun was safe. He was not, they argued, culpable in any way. ; Some believed that Baldwin would never be charged because he is a rich and powerful Hollywood personality. ; Maybe both of those facts play heavily in Baldwin’s favor.</p>



<p>Of course, the gun should have been safe. ; Established procedures require that guns on the set were to manage by an armor – whose primary duty is to inspect the guns before every use. ; The armor, Hannah Gutierrez Reed, handed the gun to Assistant Director Dave Halls&#8211; assuring him it was safe. ; Halls was also required to inspect the gun to ensure that it was safe before handing it to Baldwin. ; He apparently just passed it on to Baldwin. ; Obviously, both the armor and the assistant director failed in their responsibilities.</p>



<p>So, why should Baldwin be held accountable?</p>



<p>First of all, Baldwin was the Executive Producer for the movie. ; That means he is potentially responsible for anything that happens on the set. ; He is also responsible for the conduct of his underlings – in this case, the assistant director and the armor. ; ;</p>



<p>But that is not enough to get Baldwin a criminal charge. ; It does expose him to a civil suit by Hutchins’ family. ; Though it received little media attention, that has already been done with an out-of-court settlement that awarded an unspecified amount of money to the Hutchins family. ; It did not settle the feelings, however. ; The family issued a statement applauding Baldwin’s indictment for “negligent manslaughter.&#8221; ; (Not the kind of “applause” Baldwin is used to.)</p>



<p>When it was learned that the prosecutor, in this case, was about to announce a decision regarding Baldwin, virtually every media panelist predicted that there would be no charges. ; One former federal prosecutor even said that Baldwin’s defense was to explain that the actor was handling what was essentially a “toy gun.”</p>



<p>(What? ; A real bullet from that gun killed one and wounded another. ; And the media prosecutor would try to convince a jury that it was merely a toy gun? ; I am no lawyer, but I think that would be hard to sell to 12 folks. ; But I digress.)</p>



<p>Prosecutors do not indict unless they believe they have a better than 50/50 chance of securing a guilty verdict. ; So, what is the case to be made against Baldwin?</p>



<p>It turns out that Baldwin also has a responsibility in the handling of gun on a set. ; He arguably failed to meet that responsibility – acted recklessly – and a person died.</p>



<p>He was also supposed to inspect the gun himself to make sure there were no live rounds in any of the chambers. ; Blanks and live rounds are distinctively different – and Baldwin was &#8212; or should have been &#8211;familiar with the differences.</p>



<p>There is a general prohibition against having ANY live ammunition on a movie set in which guns are part of the production. ; As Executive Producer, he bears some responsibility for that failure – especially when it has been rumored that he was aware of live rounds being used on the set for recreational purposes.</p>



<p>Also, Baldwin violated the general prohibition of never pointing a gun – believed to be loaded or unloaded – at another human being. ; Baldwin aimed directly at Hutchins &#8212; even though in no scene would she have been standing at the business end of a pistol. ; Why did he point it at her to test fire it? ; That is a question for the jury to decide.</p>



<p>Apparently, they were not officially rehearsing a scene, and Hutchins was not recording at that moment. ; It was more or less a personal rehearsal of drawing the gun and aiming. ; Again, why at Hutchins, and why was it necessary to pull the trigger? ; (It is not likely that Baldwin’s claim of never having pulled the trigger will hold up in court against expert testing and testimony.)</p>



<p>I am inclined to go with the prosecutor in this case &#8212; with a better than 50/50 chance Baldwin will get convicted. ; If not, it will be due to the issue of “celebrity privilege” that has enabled a lot of bad actors (no pun intended) to avoid justice.</p>



<p>So, there ‘tis.</p>

Alec Baldwin Charged with Manslaughter
