Sujet : Re: Alec Baldwin getting away with murder
De : ahk (at) *nospam* chinet.com (Adam H. Kerman)
Groupes : rec.arts.tvDate : 07. Mar 2024, 21:54:42
Autres entêtes
Organisation : A noiseless patient Spider
Message-ID : <usd622$17hki$1@dont-email.me>
References : 1 2 3
Blueshirt <
blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
EGK wrote:
Thu, 7 Mar 2024 09:59:02 -0700, anim8rfsk <anim8rfsk@cox.net>:
https://deadline.com/2024/03/rust-movie-armorer-guilty-shooting-death-1235847983/
Classic example of shit rolling downhill and our two-tiered
justice system. Baldwin is "loose" with weapons on the set
and he fires the fatal shot but because he hired a young and
very inexperienced armorer, she ends up being the perfect
scapegoat.
It's not about who hired the armourer or who held the gun, the
interesting thing about this case for me is who put the live
round in to a "prop" gun ... and was it deliberate?!
I never understood how "I didn't mean to!" is an all-purpose excuse for
any responsible adult.
SOMEBODY brought live ammunition to the set so bored actors and crew
members could should off the antique weapons.
SOMEBODY mixed all those rounds together -- live ammunition, depleted,
and blanks.
SOMEBODY grabbed rounds from the mixed rounds, failing to check that
live ammunition had been loaded. How does that waive liability?
Such an act would be reckless, not negligent.
If it was a willful act, it was likely somebody about to shoot off the
gun for fun who then got called back to his duties and failed to remove
the live round. I doubt very much it was intended to kill.