1y ago

Alec Baldwin may be recharged with Rust gun death because of 'additional facts'

www.bbc.com Alec Baldwin may be recharged with Rust gun death because of 'additional facts'

A grand jury will be asked to consider "additional facts" in the on-set shooting, prosecutors say.

New Mexico prosecutors plan to recharge Alec Baldwin with involuntary manslaughter over a fatal on-set shooting in October 2021.

The prosecutors dismissed charges against the Emmy award-winning actor in April, just two weeks before his trial was due to start.

But "additional facts" merit bringing the case again before a grand jury next month, they said.

You're viewing a single thread.

41 comments

I'm sure there's some degree of legal culpability when you're the one holding the gun. What's weird to me is that anything illegal can have the word "involuntary" in the title.
- It is basically when someone is doing something illegal and stupid, but isn’t thinking about it killing someone. Then accidentally kills someone.
  Voluntary manslaughter is then when you do something that you know will kill a person, but for some reason it isn’t murder.
  For lots (most?) laws, ignorance isn’t an excuse… even though the specific charge may change.
  
  It varies from state to state.
  I've been watching a case out in California where it ended in conviction for voluntary manslaughter instead of murder.
  The basic situation was two random guys who didn't know each other got into an argument outside a bar ending in one shooting and killing the other.
  Under California law, the intent to kill was there, but it was an in the moment fit of rage, not planned or premeditated.
  I was on a jury in Texas with a similar situation that ended in a murder conviction because under Texas law, the intent to kill in and of itself is murder regardless of planning or premeditation.
  The sentences between the two cases were twenty years in California and thirty years in Texas, but either or both could've gone longer or shorter.
  Same effective crime and punishment, different labels.
  
  How long ago was this? Because if it was a similar situation, the lawyer for Texas should have easily made the argument necessary in (d) here.
  
  It was 2019 and the defense attorney raised no such argument. He planned on appealing the guilty verdict and did so unsuccessfully. I think making that argument would've been an implicit admission of guilt making appeal impossible. We had guidelines of anywhere from 2-99 years or life.
  Let me tell you, it was tough to get the "hang the black kid immediately" jurors DOWN to thirty. About three of the twelve just immediately said 99 years and took hours and hours to come down at all.
  If memory serves, the true max before eligibility for parole was thirty years. With the thirty year sentence, he's eligible at fifteen years. Life or 99 would be eligible at thirty years.
  Where the defendant got lucky was that it was over a weed deal gone bad. The gist is that the deceased showed up, and there was either an argument over price or the defendant tried to rob him and it went haywire.
  Had the police been able to find evidence of marijuana, which they did not, it could've been a capital crime eligible for the death penalty - murder while in the commission of a felony.
- Involuntary manslaughter is a form homicide that derived from negligence.
  Usually, you failed to do something that you should have done, and that failing resulted in the death of someone. In Baldwin’s case, he had an obligation to handle the firearm safely and did not.
  It’s considered “involuntary” because you didn’t intend to actually kill them.
  I’m about to get downvoted to shit here, because there’s a surprising number of people that are about to carve out exceptions because an “expert” handed it to him. That doesn’t absolve anyone of personal responsibility to behave in a safe manner…
  
  I don't see any reason to downvote you, it's a fair opinion.
  I don't really agree. While it's definitely good practice to handle firearm safety even with prop guns, I also don't see any reason to expect a real gun.
  But I know very little about guns. I have never seen or even heard of someone handling one over here. I guess the USA is different and there is actually a real chance a real gun ends up between prop guns.
  
  Real guns firing blanks are used in higher budget Hollywood films because it looks more realistic. Many TV shows will use gas blowback airsoft pistols and add muzzle flash in post production but you can tell because there are never spent casings being ejected.
  
  I say only that it is a poor choice of word. Why not "negligent manslaughter" or some such?
  As to theories of guilt, I agree with you.
  
  It's not called negligent manslaughter because negligence is not the only situation that can result in a charge of involuntary manslaughter. For example, in some places it can apply to an unintentional death during commission of certain misdemeanors.
  
  Interesting but confusing. Thanks for explaining, you seem to know your stuff.
- This is a movie set where guns are part of the movie. What I don't understand is how there were any real guns with real bullets allowed anywhere on set. Prop guns exist ffs.
  
  There is a lot to do with how guns actuate and how people react to the gun kicking and the sounds from blanks. Most movies use real guns and blanks.
  Imagine holding a fake gun and making pew pew noises. I don't care how good of an actor you are, you cannot make the gun move realistically.
  
  I could never point a realistic weapon at someone and fire without first checking the bullets for myself. Every single time. Human life is more valuable than any job.
  
  Once you've done it a hundred times, I bet you'd get lax. It's human nature. That's why we don't leave it to actors and employee armorers specifically for this purpose.

41 comments