Wow. I cannot believe you just posted that, aceplace.
I have to admit that thought had also crossed my mind, although I didn’t want to be the first person to post the possibility.
Crew walks off the set a few hours before the accident? Non union workers replace them. Yes, the police will be looking at the circumstances closely.
You mean stuff like this?
[quote=“Cartooniverse, post:216, topic:952960”] At least get that RIGHT.
[/quote]
That’s a real stretch. Those were camera people, not prop people.
The police will be investigating the prop people, the camera people, the DOP’s husband, and the director’s wife. They have to check out all possibilities.
It only takes one idiot that wanted to shut down the set. A harmless gun misfire that tragically goes wrong.
I hope that didn’t happen. But it has to be considered.
Very good idea.
[Bolding mine]
If I may, a bit of advice. Get some facts on the table before you run ahead of the story and latch onto a misinterpreted version of reality.
Yes, we can speculate but should we?
“We all” don’t know shit about this. This is the van lifers homicide thread all over again.
I doubt it. It’s the Santa Fe County Sheriff’s Department conducting the investigation, not the FBI. Their resources are limited. And with a perfectly straightforward explanation that this was an accident, absent evidence to the contrary they’re not going to go chasing conspiracy theories.
Ah! But will they be investigating the DP’s husband? That’s what I wanna know.
Why? That sounds a little salacious.
This just came up on my phone, from Chicago TV station WGN, quoting an AP story:
[/quote]
Yep.
" Fighting Ignorance Since At Least 1973 ". I provided accurate information.
You’re welcome.
OK @Acsenray & @Cartooniverse, enough of this. Drop it or take it to the Pit.
Lt. Provenza: “It’s always the spouse”
NYT (paywalled):
https://www.nytimes.com/live/2021/10/22/us/alec-baldwin-shooting-movie-set
The assistant director of the western film “Rust” grabbed a prop pistol from a gray cart and handed it to the movie’s star, Alec Baldwin, shouting “cold gun!” — which was supposed to indicate that it did not contain any live rounds, and was safe to handle around the crew huddled by the camera.
But the weapon fired when Mr. Baldwin pulled the trigger a few minutes later, discharging a live projectile that hit the director, Joel Souza, in the shoulder and struck the director of photography, Halyna Hutchins, in the chest, killing her.
…
A state magistrate judge granted the request, which includes an examination of the gun for biological evidence as well as a review of cameras, film, memory cards or other video recorders that may provide information in the case. …
The weapon was “set up” on the tray by the movie’s weapons specialist, or armorer, along with a Western-style gun belt used in the scene. Detective Cano did not say what the armorer told investigators …
Is this an accepted procedure on set, someone other than the armorer issuing the firearm and declaring it “cold”?
The “prop gets switched and somebody dies” plot device is evidently so common that there’s a TV Tropes entry for it.
(I am not suggesting that this is what happened with Baldwin.)
As a kid of union parents, my views on unions are that they are utterly crucial, yet as soon as I read all the speculations I had to include the possibility that a live bullet had been substituted as deliberate sabotage and that a union payback was a motivation.
Does anyone think that this is more scurrilous than “Alec Baldwin is a murderer”? It has to be thought, and has to be investigated, and hopefully fully disproved.
there might be a chain-of-custody issue.
AP NEWS
The gun was one of three that the film’s armorer, Hannah Gutierrez, had set on a cart outside the wooden structure where a scene was being acted, according to the records. Assistant director Dave Halls grabbed the gun from the cart and brought it inside to Baldwin, unaware that it was loaded with live rounds, a detective wrote in the search warrant application.
The prop gun was outside and then brought inside. Does that mean it was unguarded and subject to tampering?
And why isn’t the armorer handling the prop?