• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

RUST murder By accident? / Did NRA training Cause the Rust Accident?

I agree the manslaughter charge was ridiclous, but, since this whole film has been Baldwin's Baby from day one, I think he bears responsbilty for the incredibly unsafe procedures on the set which led to the shooting. He hired the cheapest help he could get, and disaster followed.
But of course he is a Liberal and has said nasty things abour Trump. so that should make him above the law.

There is a difference between law and Justice, that's what I have been trying to tell people all along, the law stinks.
 
I agree the manslaughter charge was ridiclous, but, since this whole film has been Baldwin's Baby from day one, I think he bears responsbilty for the incredibly unsafe procedures on the set which led to the shooting. He hired the cheapest help he could get, and disaster followed.
But of course he is a Liberal and has said nasty things abour Trump. so that should make him above the law.
Oh FFS grow up and cop on.

If you have specific information on failings, or deviations from IBP please detail them and refrain from random nonsense.
 
The article says the gun had a new trigger. Does replacing worn out parts count as a modification that voids charges? Seems to me that they need to determine what the modifications exactly were first, and if they were somehow substandard before dropping anything.

If a car has been serviced in it's lifetime, that doesn't give you carte blanche to drive recklessly and blame the car. Every important safety breach still stands, including Baldwin needlessly pointing a gun at a person he did not intend to shoot.

I asked Baldwin defenders earlier if they would put a prop gun to their temples and pull the trigger before pointing it at someone else. I think most understand that such an action is wildly unsafe and inappropriate. So why is the same prudence not applied to those you point at?
 
I agree the manslaughter charge was ridiclous, but, since this whole film has been Baldwin's Baby from day one, I think he bears responsbilty for the incredibly unsafe procedures on the set which led to the shooting. He hired the cheapest help he could get, and disaster followed.
But of course he is a Liberal and has said nasty things abour Trump. so that should make him above the law.

I’m sorry I didn’t realise you were in this thread also having the same difficulties you were having in the other thread. Let me try to put you right again. The person who comes up with the movie idea, is not the same person who hires the crew. It’s often extremely complicated, but if you’re willing to do the work, here’s an excellent article from shortly after the shooting which reveals a sense of who’s actually making the movie.

If you need the TLDR version, this is the best I can do, the link is below:

Baldwin’s company El Dorado Pictures developed and sold ‘his baby’ to Thomasville Pictures in return for a producer credit and fee. Thomasville Pictures created and operated Rust Movie Productions LLC, which was making the movie and paying Baldwin. The Thomasville officers operated the Rust LLC as producers of the movie. The line producer and associated team hired by the LLC via 3rd Shift Media, was responsible for day to day crew hiring and budget management.

https://deadline.com/2021/10/alec-b...ylna-hutchins-death-investigation-1234864223/

If you read the article and still come away thinking Baldwin had any right or obligation or desire to get involved in managing props handlers, and catering, and horse manure clean-up, while also holding down a job as the lead actor, come back to me with questions and I’ll do my best.
 
The article says the gun had a new trigger. Does replacing worn out parts count as a modification that voids charges? Seems to me that they need to determine what the modifications exactly were first, and if they were somehow substandard before dropping anything.

If a car has been serviced in it's lifetime, that doesn't give you carte blanche to drive recklessly and blame the car. Every important safety breach still stands, including Baldwin needlessly pointing a gun at a person he did not intend to shoot.

I asked Baldwin defenders earlier if they would put a prop gun to their temples and pull the trigger before pointing it at someone else. I think most understand that such an action is wildly unsafe and inappropriate. So why is the same prudence not applied to those you point at?
It's impossible for the prosecutors to demonstrate the weapon matched factory specs, hence reasonable doubt.
 
It's impossible for the prosecutors to demonstrate the weapon matched factory specs, hence reasonable doubt.
The prosecutors aren't required to demonstrate factory specs. They can choose any reasonable spec they think they can prove in court. I'm sure they could find a gunsmith willing to testify as an expert witness to any spec they cared to prove.
 
The prosecutors aren't required to demonstrate factory specs. They can choose any reasonable spec they think they can prove in court. I'm sure they could find a gunsmith willing to testify as an expert witness to any spec they cared to prove.

The FBI examined the gun and the whole case was built on that Examination,
the fact the FBI didn't find the trigger had been replaced calls into Question that Examination.
There is reasonable doubt the gun was in a condition where Sheer contact was faulty, and Baldwin took no deliberate act to fire the gun.
That Baldwin didn't pull the Trigger and was telling the truth.
 

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom