Alec Baldwin continues his legal strategy of making himself look as
unsympathetic as possible with respect to his accidental shooting and
killing of cinematographer Halyna Hutchins during production of Rust. He
also accidentally shot and wounded director Joel Souza with the same
magic bullet that had passed through Hutchins.

He's being sued by Mamie Mitchell, script supervisor, who was standing
next to Hutchins but wasn't injured. He filed a cross complaint against
her seeking to claim any damages she'll win suing, I guess, Baldwin and
everybody else.

bonk

In the cross complaint, Baldwin CONTINUES to claim that he pulled back
and released the hammer, which fired the gun, even though gun experts
including those at the FBI who examined the weapon concluded that it
could not have been fired in the way he claimed without Baldwin having
squeezed the trigger.

I'm still puzzled by the finding from the autopsy that the death was
accidental and not homicide. The finding from the autopsy does not rule
on intent. Homicide means death caused by a person, which is clearly
what happened here. If Baldwin is ever prosecuted (clearly the case
isn't going to trial after the next commercial break), he'll have to be
prosecuted on manslaughter which requires proving that his conduct was
criminally reckless and not intentional. He was obligated to check for a
live round even though he was told there wasn't a live round.

Plus he continues to lie about the trigger pull.

Baldwin is suing the armorer and her boss the propmaster and the A.D.
(also safety coordinator snarf) who declared the gun "clear" while
handing it to him. He's also suing the ammunition supplier. I don't
believe for a moment that the ammunition supplier was at fault for the
live rounds being mixed together with other rounds, given that the
ammunition supplier had no ability to control how anything was used on
set and it's known that the ammunition was reguarly left unattended so
people could just fire off live rounds from the antique weapons and
reproduction weapons.

double bonk

Baldwin is going for the "Have mercy. I'm an orphan" sympathy defense.
(The ancient gag is that the orphan is charged with having murdered his
parents.)

Baldwin had gotten fired from jobs and lost job opportunities and has
suffered from grief.

Alec Baldwin sues to 'clear his name' in movie set killing
AP
November 12, 2022
https://apnews.com/article/alec-baldwin-entertainment-new-mexico-movies-ee3ddbbcb8403e261ea81730da0eebe2

Adam H. Kerman <ahk@chinet.com> wrote:
> Alec Baldwin continues his legal strategy of making himself look as
> unsympathetic as possible with respect to his accidental shooting and
> killing of cinematographer Halyna Hutchins during production of Rust. He
> also accidentally shot and wounded director Joel Souza with the same
> magic bullet that had passed through Hutchins.

Why are you calling these accidental? pointing a loaded gun at somebody and
pulling the trigger should at best be negligent.

>
> He's being sued by Mamie Mitchell, script supervisor, who was standing
> next to Hutchins but wasn't injured. He filed a cross complaint against
> her seeking to claim any damages she'll win suing, I guess, Baldwin and
> everybody else.

Including the producers of the film which would include himself?

>
> bonk
>
> In the cross complaint, Baldwin CONTINUES to claim that he pulled back
> and released the hammer, which fired the gun, even though gun experts
> including those at the FBI who examined the weapon concluded that it
> could not have been fired in the way he claimed without Baldwin having
> squeezed the trigger.
>
> I'm still puzzled by the finding from the autopsy that the death was
> accidental and not homicide.

Oh. That’s why. I hadn’t heard that.

The finding from the autopsy does not rule
> on intent.

We see them do that all the time on TV shows!

Homicide means death caused by a person, which is clearly
> what happened here.

That may be giving Baldwin too much credit.

If Baldwin is ever prosecuted (clearly the case
> isn't going to trial after the next commercial break), he'll have to be
> prosecuted on manslaughter which requires proving that his conduct was
> criminally reckless and not intentional. He was obligated to check for a
> live round even though he was told there wasn't a live round.
>

I can’t imagine firing a six gun at someone without firing it at the ground
at least seven times first.

> Plus he continues to lie about the trigger pull.
>
> Baldwin is suing the armorer and her boss the propmaster and the A.D.
> (also safety coordinator snarf) who declared the gun "clear" while
> handing it to him. He's also suing the ammunition supplier. I don't
> believe for a moment that the ammunition supplier was at fault for the
> live rounds being mixed together with other rounds, given that the
> ammunition supplier had no ability to control how anything was used on
> set and it's known that the ammunition was reguarly left unattended so
> people could just fire off live rounds from the antique weapons and
> reproduction weapons.

Unless the ammunition supplier supplied the live rounds that shouldn’t of
been there at all. But I don’t think we’ve ever gotten a convincing version
of how that happened.

>
> double bonk
>
> Baldwin is going for the "Have mercy. I'm an orphan" sympathy defense.
> (The ancient gag is that the orphan is charged with having murdered his
> parents.)

Does that gag pre-date the Menendez brothers?

>
> Baldwin had gotten fired from jobs and lost job opportunities and has
> suffered from grief.

Plus he has been forced to pay off family members!

>
> Alec Baldwin sues to 'clear his name' in movie set killing
> AP
> November 12, 2022
> https://apnews.com/article/alec-baldwin-entertainment-new-mexico-movies-ee3ddbbcb8403e261ea81730da0eebe2
>

OK, I couldn’t find a report from a news organization about this, but I
settled for CBS instead.

You have to read all the way to the bottom. The medical examiner didn’t
declare it an accident on the basis of the autopsy but on the basis of law
enforcement reports that said things like there’s no way this nice guy who
just gave me a box of money put live rounds in the gun intentionally.

But check it out. During testing of the gun, and they don’t even know how
many times they tested it, the mechanism finally failed and now it actually
goes off without pulling the trigger the way Baldwin claimed.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/alec-baldwin-rust-fatal-shooting-accident-medical-examiner-rules/

--
The last thing I want to do is hurt you, but it is still on my list.

On 2022-11-12 1:26 PM, anim8rfsk wrote:
> Adam H. Kerman <ahk@chinet.com> wrote:
>> Alec Baldwin continues his legal strategy of making himself look as
>> unsympathetic as possible with respect to his accidental shooting and
>> killing of cinematographer Halyna Hutchins during production of Rust. He
>> also accidentally shot and wounded director Joel Souza with the same
>> magic bullet that had passed through Hutchins.
>
> Why are you calling these accidental? pointing a loaded gun at somebody and
> pulling the trigger should at best be negligent.
>
>>
>> He's being sued by Mamie Mitchell, script supervisor, who was standing
>> next to Hutchins but wasn't injured. He filed a cross complaint against
>> her seeking to claim any damages she'll win suing, I guess, Baldwin and
>> everybody else.
>
> Including the producers of the film which would include himself?
>
>>
>> bonk
>>
>> In the cross complaint, Baldwin CONTINUES to claim that he pulled back
>> and released the hammer, which fired the gun, even though gun experts
>> including those at the FBI who examined the weapon concluded that it
>> could not have been fired in the way he claimed without Baldwin having
>> squeezed the trigger.
>>
>> I'm still puzzled by the finding from the autopsy that the death was
>> accidental and not homicide.
>
> Oh. That’s why. I hadn’t heard that.
>
>
> The finding from the autopsy does not rule
>> on intent.
>
> We see them do that all the time on TV shows!
>
>
> Homicide means death caused by a person, which is clearly
>> what happened here.
>
> That may be giving Baldwin too much credit.
>
>
> If Baldwin is ever prosecuted (clearly the case
>> isn't going to trial after the next commercial break), he'll have to be
>> prosecuted on manslaughter which requires proving that his conduct was
>> criminally reckless and not intentional. He was obligated to check for a
>> live round even though he was told there wasn't a live round.
>>
>
> I can’t imagine firing a six gun at someone without firing it at the ground
> at least seven times first.
>
>
>> Plus he continues to lie about the trigger pull.
>>
>> Baldwin is suing the armorer and her boss the propmaster and the A.D.
>> (also safety coordinator snarf) who declared the gun "clear" while
>> handing it to him. He's also suing the ammunition supplier. I don't
>> believe for a moment that the ammunition supplier was at fault for the
>> live rounds being mixed together with other rounds, given that the
>> ammunition supplier had no ability to control how anything was used on
>> set and it's known that the ammunition was reguarly left unattended so
>> people could just fire off live rounds from the antique weapons and
>> reproduction weapons.
>
> Unless the ammunition supplier supplied the live rounds that shouldn’t of
> been there at all. But I don’t think we’ve ever gotten a convincing version
> of how that happened.
>
>
>>
>> double bonk
>>
>> Baldwin is going for the "Have mercy. I'm an orphan" sympathy defense.
>> (The ancient gag is that the orphan is charged with having murdered his
>> parents.)
>
> Does that gag pre-date the Menendez brothers?
>
Yes, I heard it decades before the Mendendez brothers killed their
parents. I expect it refers to some defense ploy in a trial many decades
ago but have no idea which one.
>
>>
>> Baldwin had gotten fired from jobs and lost job opportunities and has
>> suffered from grief.
>
> Plus he has been forced to pay off family members!
>
>>
>> Alec Baldwin sues to 'clear his name' in movie set killing
>> AP
>> November 12, 2022
>> https://apnews.com/article/alec-baldwin-entertainment-new-mexico-movies-ee3ddbbcb8403e261ea81730da0eebe2
>>
>
> OK, I couldn’t find a report from a news organization about this, but I
> settled for CBS instead.
>
> You have to read all the way to the bottom. The medical examiner didn’t
> declare it an accident on the basis of the autopsy but on the basis of law
> enforcement reports that said things like there’s no way this nice guy who
> just gave me a box of money put live rounds in the gun intentionally.
>
> But check it out. During testing of the gun, and they don’t even know how
> many times they tested it, the mechanism finally failed and now it actually
> goes off without pulling the trigger the way Baldwin claimed.
>
> https://www.cbsnews.com/news/alec-baldwin-rust-fatal-shooting-accident-medical-examiner-rules/
>
>
>

--
Rhino

Rhino <no_offline_contact@example.com> wrote:
> On 2022-11-12 1:26 PM, anim8rfsk wrote:
>> Adam H. Kerman <ahk@chinet.com> wrote:
>>> Alec Baldwin continues his legal strategy of making himself look as
>>> unsympathetic as possible with respect to his accidental shooting and
>>> killing of cinematographer Halyna Hutchins during production of Rust. He
>>> also accidentally shot and wounded director Joel Souza with the same
>>> magic bullet that had passed through Hutchins.
>>
>> Why are you calling these accidental? pointing a loaded gun at somebody and
>> pulling the trigger should at best be negligent.
>>
>>>
>>> He's being sued by Mamie Mitchell, script supervisor, who was standing
>>> next to Hutchins but wasn't injured. He filed a cross complaint against
>>> her seeking to claim any damages she'll win suing, I guess, Baldwin and
>>> everybody else.
>>
>> Including the producers of the film which would include himself?
>>
>>>
>>> bonk
>>>
>>> In the cross complaint, Baldwin CONTINUES to claim that he pulled back
>>> and released the hammer, which fired the gun, even though gun experts
>>> including those at the FBI who examined the weapon concluded that it
>>> could not have been fired in the way he claimed without Baldwin having
>>> squeezed the trigger.
>>>
>>> I'm still puzzled by the finding from the autopsy that the death was
>>> accidental and not homicide.
>>
>> Oh. That’s why. I hadn’t heard that.
>>
>>
>> The finding from the autopsy does not rule
>>> on intent.
>>
>> We see them do that all the time on TV shows!
>>
>>
>> Homicide means death caused by a person, which is clearly
>>> what happened here.
>>
>> That may be giving Baldwin too much credit.
>>
>>
>> If Baldwin is ever prosecuted (clearly the case
>>> isn't going to trial after the next commercial break), he'll have to be
>>> prosecuted on manslaughter which requires proving that his conduct was
>>> criminally reckless and not intentional. He was obligated to check for a
>>> live round even though he was told there wasn't a live round.
>>>
>>
>> I can’t imagine firing a six gun at someone without firing it at the ground
>> at least seven times first.
>>
>>
>>> Plus he continues to lie about the trigger pull.
>>>
>>> Baldwin is suing the armorer and her boss the propmaster and the A.D.
>>> (also safety coordinator snarf) who declared the gun "clear" while
>>> handing it to him. He's also suing the ammunition supplier. I don't
>>> believe for a moment that the ammunition supplier was at fault for the
>>> live rounds being mixed together with other rounds, given that the
>>> ammunition supplier had no ability to control how anything was used on
>>> set and it's known that the ammunition was reguarly left unattended so
>>> people could just fire off live rounds from the antique weapons and
>>> reproduction weapons.
>>
>> Unless the ammunition supplier supplied the live rounds that shouldn’t of
>> been there at all. But I don’t think we’ve ever gotten a convincing version
>> of how that happened.
>>
>>
>>>
>>> double bonk
>>>
>>> Baldwin is going for the "Have mercy. I'm an orphan" sympathy defense.
>>> (The ancient gag is that the orphan is charged with having murdered his
>>> parents.)
>>
>> Does that gag pre-date the Menendez brothers?
>>
> Yes, I heard it decades before the Mendendez brothers killed their
> parents. I expect it refers to some defense ploy in a trial many decades
> ago but have no idea which one.

Thanks. I remember it clearly from the Menendez era but had no idea it had
a precedent.

>>
>>>
>>> Baldwin had gotten fired from jobs and lost job opportunities and has
>>> suffered from grief.
>>
>> Plus he has been forced to pay off family members!
>>
>>>
>>> Alec Baldwin sues to 'clear his name' in movie set killing
>>> AP
>>> November 12, 2022
>>> https://apnews.com/article/alec-baldwin-entertainment-new-mexico-movies-ee3ddbbcb8403e261ea81730da0eebe2
>>>
>>
>> OK, I couldn’t find a report from a news organization about this, but I
>> settled for CBS instead.
>>
>> You have to read all the way to the bottom. The medical examiner didn’t
>> declare it an accident on the basis of the autopsy but on the basis of law
>> enforcement reports that said things like there’s no way this nice guy who
>> just gave me a box of money put live rounds in the gun intentionally.
>>
>> But check it out. During testing of the gun, and they don’t even know how
>> many times they tested it, the mechanism finally failed and now it actually
>> goes off without pulling the trigger the way Baldwin claimed.
>>
>> https://www.cbsnews.com/news/alec-baldwin-rust-fatal-shooting-accident-medical-examiner-rules/
>>
>>
>>
>

--
The last thing I want to do is hurt you, but it is still on my list.

> anim8rfsk
> > Adam H. Kerman
> >
> > He's also suing the ammunition supplier. I don't believe for a moment
> > that the ammunition supplier was at fault for the live rounds being
> > mixed together with other rounds, given that the ammunition supplier
> > had no ability to control how anything was used on set and it's known
> > that the ammunition was reguarly left unattended so people could just
> > fire off live rounds from the antique weapons and reproduction weapons.
>
> Unless the ammunition supplier supplied the live rounds that shouldn’t of
> been there at all. But I don’t think we’ve ever gotten a convincing version
> of how that happened.

I'd say it's very unlikely that the same ammo manufacturer produced ALL
the ammo, (that was mixed up willy-nilly on the set) also, the ammo would
have been simply bought by the armorer from any number of stores or on-line
dealers, not "supplied" by the manufacturer.

https://i.postimg.cc/W1k7t5fy/ammo-Blank-rounds.jpg
https://i.postimg.cc/4yy6GP9B/ammo-Dummy-rounds.jpg
https://i.postimg.cc/d0FG3wC7/ammo-Live-rounds.jpg

> But check it out. During testing of the gun, and they don’t even know how
> many times they tested it, the mechanism finally failed and now it actually
> goes off without pulling the trigger the way Baldwin claimed.
>
> https://www.cbsnews.com/news/alec-baldwin-rust-fatal-shooting-accident-medical-examiner-rules/
>
> With the hammer in full cock position, the FBI report stated the gun could
> not be made to fire without pulling the trigger while the working internal
> components were intact and functional.
>
> During the testing of the gun by the FBI, authorities said, portions of the
> gun's trigger sear and cylinder stop fractured while the hammer was struck.
> That allowed the hammer to fall and the firing pin to detonate the primer..
>
> "This was the only successful discharge during this testing and it was
> attributed to the fracture of internal components, not the failure of the
> firearm or safety mechanisms," the report stated.
>
> It was unclear from the FBI report how many times the revolver's hammer may
> have been struck during the testing.

So, they literally beat the fuck out of the revolver with a hammer until
it finally broke.

I don't see how this is relevant, as the gun Baldwin used wasn't broken?

In article
<923618648.689974057.554932.anim8rfsk-cox.net@news.easynews.com>,
anim8rfsk <anim8rfsk@cox.net> wrote:

> >>> Baldwin is going for the "Have mercy. I'm an orphan" sympathy defense.
> >>> (The ancient gag is that the orphan is charged with having murdered his
> >>> parents.)
> >>
> >> Does that gag pre-date the Menendez brothers?
> >>
> > Yes, I heard it decades before the Mendendez brothers killed their
> > parents. I expect it refers to some defense ploy in a trial many decades
> > ago but have no idea which one.
>
> Thanks. I remember it clearly from the Menendez era but had no idea it had
> a precedent.

The first time I heard it, many years ago, the line about the murderer
of his parents asking for mercy because he was an orphan was the
definition of chutzpah.

anim8rfsk <anim8rfsk@cox.net> wrote:
>Adam H. Kerman <ahk@chinet.com> wrote:

>>Alec Baldwin continues his legal strategy of making himself look as
>>unsympathetic as possible with respect to his accidental shooting and
>>killing of cinematographer Halyna Hutchins during production of Rust. He
>>also accidentally shot and wounded director Joel Souza with the same
>>magic bullet that had passed through Hutchins.

>Why are you calling these accidental? pointing a loaded gun at somebody and
>pulling the trigger should at best be negligent.

It's criminal recklessness and therefore manslaughter. "Accident" just
means "without intent", which is true. It doesn't mean no liability and
it doesn't mean no crime.
>>He's being sued by Mamie Mitchell, script supervisor, who was standing
>>next to Hutchins but wasn't injured. He filed a cross complaint against
>>her seeking to claim any damages she'll win suing, I guess, Baldwin and
>>everybody else.

>Including the producers of the film which would include himself?
>>bonk

>>In the cross complaint, Baldwin CONTINUES to claim that he pulled back
>>and released the hammer, which fired the gun, even though gun experts
>>including those at the FBI who examined the weapon concluded that it
>>could not have been fired in the way he claimed without Baldwin having
>>squeezed the trigger.

>>I'm still puzzled by the finding from the autopsy that the death was
>>accidental and not homicide.

>Oh. That's why. I hadn't heard that.

The finding at autopsy doesn't preclude a criminal charge for
manslaughter.

>>The finding from the autopsy does not rule on intent.

>We see them do that all the time on TV shows!

>>Homicide means death caused by a person, which is clearly what happened here.

>That may be giving Baldwin too much credit.

>>If Baldwin is ever prosecuted (clearly the case isn't going to trial
>>after the next commercial break), he'll have to be prosecuted on
>>manslaughter which requires proving that his conduct was criminally
>>reckless and not intentional. He was obligated to check for a live
>>round even though he was told there wasn't a live round.

>I can't imagine firing a six gun at someone without firing it at the ground
>at least seven times first.

>>Plus he continues to lie about the trigger pull.

>>Baldwin is suing the armorer and her boss the propmaster and the A.D.
>>(also safety coordinator snarf) who declared the gun "clear" while
>>handing it to him. He's also suing the ammunition supplier. I don't
>>believe for a moment that the ammunition supplier was at fault for the
>>live rounds being mixed together with other rounds, given that the
>>ammunition supplier had no ability to control how anything was used on
>>set and it's known that the ammunition was reguarly left unattended so
>>people could just fire off live rounds from the antique weapons and
>>reproduction weapons.

>Unless the ammunition supplier supplied the live rounds that shouldn't of
>been there at all. But I don't think we've ever gotten a convincing version
>of how that happened.

The claim is that the rounds were mixed together because the supplier
was at fault. I don't buy that for a minute. Unless the supplier had
actual knowledge of these massive safety violations on the movie set --
and how could he -- I don't see how he has any liability.
>>double bonk

>>Baldwin is going for the "Have mercy. I'm an orphan" sympathy defense.
>>(The ancient gag is that the orphan is charged with having murdered his
>>parents.)

>Does that gag pre-date the Menendez brothers?
>>Baldwin had gotten fired from jobs and lost job opportunities and has
>>suffered from grief.

>Plus he has been forced to pay off family members!
>>Alec Baldwin sues to 'clear his name' in movie set killing
>>AP
>>November 12, 2022
>>https://apnews.com/article/alec-baldwin-entertainment-new-mexico-movies-ee3ddbbcb8403e261ea81730da0eebe2

>OK, I couldn't find a report from a news organization about this, but I
>settled for CBS instead.

>You have to read all the way to the bottom. The medical examiner didn't
>declare it an accident on the basis of the autopsy but on the basis of law
>enforcement reports that said things like there's no way this nice guy who
>just gave me a box of money put live rounds in the gun intentionally.

In reaching its conclusion that the shooting was an accident,
the New Mexico's medical investigator's office pointed to "the
absence of obvious intent to cause harm or death" and stated
that there was "no compelling demonstration" stated that the
revolver was intentionally loaded with live ammunition on the
set.

"intentionally loaded with live ammunition"

There was reckless conduct on the part of the three people known to have
handled the weapon loaded with the live round. That recklessness made it
possible for Baldwin, in shooting the gun, to kill one person and wound
another.

That sounds like an abuse of discretion to me.

>But check it out. During testing of the gun, and they don't even know how
>many times they tested it, the mechanism finally failed and now it actually
>goes off without pulling the trigger the way Baldwin claimed.

>https://www.cbsnews.com/news/alec-baldwin-rust-fatal-shooting-accident-medical-examiner-rules/

Ok, ok. They wore out the parts during testing. The parts were not worn
out when Baldwin fired it, so he's still lying about not having pulled
the trigger.

Ed Stasiak <edstasiak1067@gmail.com> wrote:
>> anim8rfsk
>>> Adam H. Kerman
>>>
>>> He's also suing the ammunition supplier. I don't believe for a moment
>>> that the ammunition supplier was at fault for the live rounds being
>>> mixed together with other rounds, given that the ammunition supplier
>>> had no ability to control how anything was used on set and it's known
>>> that the ammunition was reguarly left unattended so people could just
>>> fire off live rounds from the antique weapons and reproduction weapons.
>>
>> Unless the ammunition supplier supplied the live rounds that shouldn’t of
>> been there at all. But I don’t think we’ve ever gotten a convincing version
>> of how that happened.
>
> I'd say it's very unlikely that the same ammo manufacturer produced ALL
> the ammo, (that was mixed up willy-nilly on the set) also, the ammo would
> have been simply bought by the armorer from any number of stores or on-line
> dealers, not "supplied" by the manufacturer.
>
> https://i.postimg.cc/W1k7t5fy/ammo-Blank-rounds.jpg
> https://i.postimg.cc/4yy6GP9B/ammo-Dummy-rounds.jpg
> https://i.postimg.cc/d0FG3wC7/ammo-Live-rounds.jpg
>
>> But check it out. During testing of the gun, and they don’t even know how
>> many times they tested it, the mechanism finally failed and now it actually
>> goes off without pulling the trigger the way Baldwin claimed.
>>
>> https://www.cbsnews.com/news/alec-baldwin-rust-fatal-shooting-accident-medical-examiner-rules/
>>
>>
>> With the hammer in full cock position, the FBI report stated the gun could
>> not be made to fire without pulling the trigger while the working internal
>> components were intact and functional.
>>
>> During the testing of the gun by the FBI, authorities said, portions of the
>> gun's trigger sear and cylinder stop fractured while the hammer was struck.
>> That allowed the hammer to fall and the firing pin to detonate the primer.
>>
>> "This was the only successful discharge during this testing and it was
>> attributed to the fracture of internal components, not the failure of the
>> firearm or safety mechanisms," the report stated.
>>
>> It was unclear from the FBI report how many times the revolver's hammer may
>> have been struck during the testing.
>
> So, they literally beat the fuck out of the revolver with a hammer until
> it finally broke.
>
> I don't see how this is relevant, as the gun Baldwin used wasn't broken?
>

He claims it was

--
The last thing I want to do is hurt you, but it is still on my list.

Adam H. Kerman <ahk@chinet.com> wrote:
> anim8rfsk <anim8rfsk@cox.net> wrote:
>> Adam H. Kerman <ahk@chinet.com> wrote:
>
>>> Alec Baldwin continues his legal strategy of making himself look as
>>> unsympathetic as possible with respect to his accidental shooting and
>>> killing of cinematographer Halyna Hutchins during production of Rust. He
>>> also accidentally shot and wounded director Joel Souza with the same
>>> magic bullet that had passed through Hutchins.
>
>> Why are you calling these accidental? pointing a loaded gun at somebody and
>> pulling the trigger should at best be negligent.
>
> It's criminal recklessness and therefore manslaughter. "Accident" just
> means "without intent", which is true. It doesn't mean no liability and
> it doesn't mean no crime.
>
>>> He's being sued by Mamie Mitchell, script supervisor, who was standing
>>> next to Hutchins but wasn't injured. He filed a cross complaint against
>>> her seeking to claim any damages she'll win suing, I guess, Baldwin and
>>> everybody else.
>
>> Including the producers of the film which would include himself?
>
>>> bonk
>
>>> In the cross complaint, Baldwin CONTINUES to claim that he pulled back
>>> and released the hammer, which fired the gun, even though gun experts
>>> including those at the FBI who examined the weapon concluded that it
>>> could not have been fired in the way he claimed without Baldwin having
>>> squeezed the trigger.
>
>>> I'm still puzzled by the finding from the autopsy that the death was
>>> accidental and not homicide.
>
>> Oh. That's why. I hadn't heard that.
>
> The finding at autopsy doesn't preclude a criminal charge for
> manslaughter.
>
>>> The finding from the autopsy does not rule on intent.
>
>> We see them do that all the time on TV shows!
>
>>> Homicide means death caused by a person, which is clearly what happened here.
>
>> That may be giving Baldwin too much credit.
>
>>> If Baldwin is ever prosecuted (clearly the case isn't going to trial
>>> after the next commercial break), he'll have to be prosecuted on
>>> manslaughter which requires proving that his conduct was criminally
>>> reckless and not intentional. He was obligated to check for a live
>>> round even though he was told there wasn't a live round.
>
>> I can't imagine firing a six gun at someone without firing it at the ground
>> at least seven times first.
>
>>> Plus he continues to lie about the trigger pull.
>
>>> Baldwin is suing the armorer and her boss the propmaster and the A.D.
>>> (also safety coordinator snarf) who declared the gun "clear" while
>>> handing it to him. He's also suing the ammunition supplier. I don't
>>> believe for a moment that the ammunition supplier was at fault for the
>>> live rounds being mixed together with other rounds, given that the
>>> ammunition supplier had no ability to control how anything was used on
>>> set and it's known that the ammunition was reguarly left unattended so
>>> people could just fire off live rounds from the antique weapons and
>>> reproduction weapons.
>
>> Unless the ammunition supplier supplied the live rounds that shouldn't of
>> been there at all. But I don't think we've ever gotten a convincing version
>> of how that happened.
>
> The claim is that the rounds were mixed together because the supplier
> was at fault. I don't buy that for a minute. Unless the supplier had
> actual knowledge of these massive safety violations on the movie set --
> and how could he -- I don't see how he has any liability.
>
>>> double bonk
>
>>> Baldwin is going for the "Have mercy. I'm an orphan" sympathy defense.
>>> (The ancient gag is that the orphan is charged with having murdered his
>>> parents.)
>
>> Does that gag pre-date the Menendez brothers?
>
>>> Baldwin had gotten fired from jobs and lost job opportunities and has
>>> suffered from grief.
>
>> Plus he has been forced to pay off family members!
>
>>> Alec Baldwin sues to 'clear his name' in movie set killing
>>> AP
>>> November 12, 2022
>>> https://apnews.com/article/alec-baldwin-entertainment-new-mexico-movies-ee3ddbbcb8403e261ea81730da0eebe2
>
>> OK, I couldn't find a report from a news organization about this, but I
>> settled for CBS instead.
>
>> You have to read all the way to the bottom. The medical examiner didn't
>> declare it an accident on the basis of the autopsy but on the basis of law
>> enforcement reports that said things like there's no way this nice guy who
>> just gave me a box of money put live rounds in the gun intentionally.
>
> In reaching its conclusion that the shooting was an accident,
> the New Mexico's medical investigator's office pointed to "the
> absence of obvious intent to cause harm or death" and stated
> that there was "no compelling demonstration" stated that the
> revolver was intentionally loaded with live ammunition on the
> set.
>
> "intentionally loaded with live ammunition"
>
> There was reckless conduct on the part of the three people known to have
> handled the weapon loaded with the live round. That recklessness made it
> possible for Baldwin, in shooting the gun, to kill one person and wound
> another.
>
> That sounds like an abuse of discretion to me.
>
>> But check it out. During testing of the gun, and they don't even know how
>> many times they tested it, the mechanism finally failed and now it actually
>> goes off without pulling the trigger the way Baldwin claimed.
>
>> https://www.cbsnews.com/news/alec-baldwin-rust-fatal-shooting-accident-medical-examiner-rules/
>
> Ok, ok. They wore out the parts during testing. The parts were not worn
> out when Baldwin fired it, so he's still lying about not having pulled
> the trigger.
>

Oh, I agree, but I bet they can use that to muddy the waters pretty good.

--
The last thing I want to do is hurt you, but it is still on my list.

On 11/12/22 6:54 PM, Adam H. Kerman wrote:
> anim8rfsk <anim8rfsk@cox.net> wrote:
>> Adam H. Kerman <ahk@chinet.com> wrote:
>
>>> Alec Baldwin continues his legal strategy of making himself look as
>>> unsympathetic as possible with respect to his accidental shooting and
>>> killing of cinematographer Halyna Hutchins during production of Rust. He
>>> also accidentally shot and wounded director Joel Souza with the same
>>> magic bullet that had passed through Hutchins.
>
>> Why are you calling these accidental? pointing a loaded gun at somebody and
>> pulling the trigger should at best be negligent.
>
> It's criminal recklessness and therefore manslaughter. "Accident" just
> means "without intent", which is true. It doesn't mean no liability and
> it doesn't mean no crime.

It is if he knew there were live rounds in the gun, which he didn't.
But you guys keep mentally masturbating, it's what you do.

And I use the word "guys" loosely of course. As if Anim8r isn't wearing
a dress when he posts.

anim8rfsk@cox.net wrote:
> Adam H. Kerman <ahk@chinet.com> wrote:

>> Baldwin is going for the "Have mercy. I'm an orphan" sympathy defense.
>> (The ancient gag is that the orphan is charged with having murdered his
>> parents.)
>
> Does that gag pre-date the Menendez brothers?

I think it does, at least I remember everyone being shocked that tried that
tactic from a joke.

>> Baldwin had gotten fired from jobs and lost job opportunities and has
>> suffered from grief.
>
> Plus he has been forced to pay off family members!

Poor, poor Alex Baldwin!

--
Let's gon Brandon!

On Sat, 12 Nov 2022 15:30:09 -0000 (UTC), "Adam H. Kerman"
<ahk@chinet.com> wrote:

>I'm still puzzled by the finding from the autopsy that the death was
>accidental and not homicide. The finding from the autopsy does not rule
>on intent. Homicide means death caused by a person, which is clearly
>what happened here. If Baldwin is ever prosecuted (clearly the case
>isn't going to trial after the next commercial break), he'll have to be
>prosecuted on manslaughter which requires proving that his conduct was
>criminally reckless and not intentional. He was obligated to check for a
>live round even though he was told there wasn't a live round.

How can it not be a homicide? Did the weapon load itself? Did the
trigger discharge itself?

Homicide doesn't imply culpability - it implies a death occured by
human action which may or may not be criminal.

My father ran over somebody who then died between the time the
ambulance unloaded them and the time the crew reached the emergency
area. This was in Tucson, AZ and after an investigation he was
released without charges.

Definitely homicide - but not criminal (since he wasn't charged).