I"ve sometimes seen “informations to obtain” that say that “FNU LNU did X.”
That means “First Name Unknown Last Name Unknown did X.”
The question for the JP asked to issue the warrant is if the information is reliable, even though the officer doesn’t know the name of one of the people involved.
Police documents have to include the necessary information, but they can’t be held to the same standard as the brief of law submitted in the closing arguments by a law firm.
More to the point, that was written by a cop, not a lawyer, right?
I would assume so.
And here’s the likely context:
the officer is taking notes of an on-the-spot interview with a person who just saw their fellow worker shot dead by another fellow worker.
And the dead person has an unusual name.
The officer asks “How do you spell that?” and the person being interviewed gives their best guess, because they’ve possibly never seen the name in writing, or it was back when they first started the filming, and the witness is more concerned about the terrible events than being able to remember exactly how to spell it.
And the officer writes it down and gets back to the office asap to get the paper going for a search warrant affidavit.
If you just saw a fellow worker shot dead, would you be able to remember how to spell an unusual name?
Also interesting (and probably meaningless) is that the Detective refers to the director by his first name, Joel, many times. Which also happens to be the detective’s first name.
As far as the gun cleaning goes, it may well have been several nights ago that the guns were taken out and the bullets mixed in with the dummy rounds, if that’s what happened.
Bill_Door, why would there be dummy rounds in the mag of a semi-auto? Did you man blanks or something else? I mean, if the gun is not to be fired for the scene, why have a magazine in it at all (I guess camera angles might matter here)
FWIW I find the people who denigrate TMZ to be a tad lazy. TMZ was founded by an entertainment lawyer (Harvey Levin) who basically built it around the concept of “we’re going to publish trash about celebrities, but we aren’t getting sued, so it’s going to be stuff we have verified with sources.”
I think TMZ has a bad reputation because of what it covers, which is mostly celebrity trash news. They also have little respect for decorum, for example they’ve pulled gritty details about celebrity suicides from police reports and published them, when other news outlets would not. But to be frank, I’ve actually never seen a prominent celebrity issue where their breaking news reporting has been proven to be materially false. Now, like any outlet they’ve reported on stories where they indicate they have limited details, and later details come in that paint a different picture, but black letter falsehoods are absolutely not the norm at TMZ.
Isn’t it you insisting that if a gun has been fired hours ago whoever picks it up would instantly know it’s been fired? I’m sorry if I mixed you up with someone else because that’s ridiculous and I wouldn’t want to pin that on you. A gun isn’t emitting a strong odor (or much of one at all) hours after it was fired. A gun isn’t going to be particularly dirty unless you fire a lot of rounds through it. A pistol can work perfectly fine without cleaning for a long time. The person picking it up (the AD) is not the one who would be cleaning it (the armorer) so he wouldn’t know how clean it was supposed to be. Insisting that a fired gun would be so smelly and filthy that anyone would know it’s been fired and should check it is absurd. Glad it wasn’t you.
Seems odd that in this day and age they’re using real guns, which can take live ammo, and not guns chambered for just blank rounds, where that’s the only thing that would fit. They’ve been shooting at each other with real guns for 100 years, it’s a wonder more people aren’t dead. It’s obvious I don’t know how H’wood works.
Apology accepted.
I’ve been trying to find out what I can about Hannah Gutierrez-Reed. With the avalanche of news stories about this incident, it’s difficult to find anything written about her beforehand, so admittedly most of what I’ve seen has been viewed through that particular lens.
But the sense I get is that she’s a bit of a cocky hotshot. We do know she’s 24 years old, and if you’ve ever been 24, you probably thought you knew a lot more than you actually did at that age. Having grown up around a lot of guns, she possibly assumed (incorrectly, of course) that there’s nothing she doesn’t know about them, and no way she would ever make a mistake with one.
24 is also commonly sort of a “why-do-I-have-to-follow-all-these-dumb-rules” age. I know better than all these old farts that have come before me, my generation has it all figured out, and so forth.
She apparently thought that simply keeping track in her head which guns had which ammunition was just fine, and had the over-confidence to think she was good enough to do so flawlessly.
Pairing this attitude with an AD who historically didn’t think much of safety regulations either created exactly the recipe for the tragedy that occurred.
Of course this is all speculation on my part, but so is 3/4 of this thread. This is what my gut says about her.
Well, it would obscure/obliterate prints placed earlier.
But injuries are very common. We Face-timed last weekend with a friend of my gf who lives/works in California. He is a wannabe actor (stunt man). He is following the case closely. He told us he has had broken ribs, sprained ankles and knees, facial bone fractures, all sorts of cuts and bruises. Even a perfectly done stunt often leaves him stiff and sore.
He only works a few times a month, but he is always recuperating from his most recent stunt.
The most damning word in that quote is “left”. In terms of chain of custody, it appears to be:
But damn, leaving guns on a cart? I’m no expert, but that doesn’t seem super safe to me.
FWIW this statement of yours is not correct, no. There is no particular reason to “know something didn’t add up.”
Today’s headline:
" ‘Rust’ crew members reportedly used guns with live ammunition hours before deadly shooting on set."
It would appear that whatever our assumptions, the worst ones turn out to be true.
From a case building point of view prints on an object that is expected to be in many hands has very little value. Not necessarily no value but probably not much.
The way to make a revolver safe is to empty all the chambers. The most likely scenario is the gun was where Baldwin placed it it dropped it after it fired and she did what she thought was her job at the time. She made the weapon safe. The police would prefer that the crime scene was as pristine as possible but it’s not always possible.
This is, legit, my greatest source of angst and dread when it comes to guns. Mass shootings are horrifying, but deaths from negligence or recklessness, and not least of all by the sort who think of themselves as “the good guy with a gun,” are far more common.
I would not be shocked to learn that someone in the chain of negligence leading to this shooting looked inward, re: their level of aptitude with firearms, and mistook desensitization and complacency for familiarity and skill. The most nearly fatal, most grossly negligent discharge of my naval career was thanks in part to one of those people. The kind of guy who would put a tomahawk (I mean an actual hatchet, like for chopping with) on his body armor and a hunting knife at his hip, in addition to an assault rifle and a sidearm. Oh, and don’t forget the oakleys! Guy was so confident with his bad-assery he would keep a round chambered (condition 1) when the order was to just have magazines inserted, but no rounds chamber (condition 3), and then when he got back from a convoy was so full of himself that after (apparently) incorrectly clearing his firearm and leaving a round in the chamber (still condition 1), he handed the gun off to a subordinate from another military that did not use that particular type of firearm and so was not familiar with it. The subordinate then negligently discharged the gun in an occupied office and penetrated two sheet metal walls with a desk chair in between. Fortunately, the chair itself was unoccupied–at the time. Would have hit whoever was sitting there in the upper torso, perhaps the heart.
But I digress. Point is, I am wary of anyone who gets a job as an armorer with their principle experience being they grew up around a parent who was well-versed in and confident with firearms. Or anyone else who think’s they’re too “experienced” to screw up.
If she was that close after it happened, it seems odd that the AD was the one who got the gun from the cart and handed it to Baldwin rather than her. I thought upthread someone said she wasn’t on the call sheet that day (but maybe that was speculation). In any case, if she was there so quickly to remove the casing after the shooting, it seems like she was on set and should have been the one to hand the gun to Baldwin in the first place.
The Daily Mail has (of course) been stalking Gutierrez-Reed, and has some photos of her at her home, taken in the last day or two.
It seems like COVID protocols kept much of the supporting crew outside of the building, only to be called in when needed. I’m sure the armorer was only second to the medics to be called in after the shooting.