20/20 2 hour Special tonight 8-10 central. Interviews with people on the set.
ABC usually unlocks 20/20 episodes within a week and anyone can watch without an account. The Baldwin interview is already available.
It’s going to be the mailbox thread all over again.
because the different types of cartridges are discernible from each other.
Jesus, lawyers talk funny. Why isn’t it called separate liability rather than several? I had to look that phrase up just to try to understand the link. I think you are right, lawsuits are going to be flying all over the place. I know one was already talked about upthread.
I totally missed this. Did you watch? Any new info?
I guess so. IIRC, you could never back up your opinion with any cites in that thread either.
There were interviews that described the days leading up to the shooting. The crew walk out and the accidental shooting.
Hannah Gutierrez Reed, Dave Halls, and Joel Souza didn’t give interviews. Segments from Baldwin’s interview were interspersed throughout the 20/20 special. Thell Reed had a few comments about his daughter’s experience. Same interview on GMA a couple days ago.
The only new information was confirmation that there is no camera footage of the accident. They weren’t recording.
Most of the 2nd hour veered off into the Midnight Rider accident in 2014. IMHO that’s a completely different situation. The director choose to film on a active railroad track without permission. That was a illegal set.
Rust Production was following industry gun safety standards. A accident occurred because a live bullet negligently got loaded into a gun.
And yet the State Supreme Court backed up what I said.
What did they say were the industry standards.
Is it worth watching in your opinion? I was hoping for at least a few of the situations that have had varying answers in the media being clarified.
I think we have already talked about it not being filmed as it was a framing shot. With digital you can see what the camera sees live on a monitor.
IANAL, I think that the term “several liability” should be understood as mean “severable liability” - the liability can be severed into parts. It probably dates to a French legal term, which has been frozen into English legal usage, and subsequent language change has made it more obscure than it originally was.
I’d recommend watching the first hour. You’ll get a better understanding of what it was like working on the set. The confusion and shock after the shooting comes across strongly. Everyone expected Helena to be OK. It took a while before the actors and crew found out she had been shot by a real bullet.
I have a better understanding of what the crew and actors experienced. Filmmaking is a collaborative effort and there’s friendship formed. Helana was well liked.
I’d stop when they begin talking about Midnight Rider. Unless you aren’t familiar with that accident.
-shakes upraised fist in the general direction of France-
I’m sure you’re right, lawyer talk has a bunch of that. But gee, I had to go thru a google search to make sure I understood the article. That’s twenty seconds out of my life I’ll never get back! And I had to learn something new.
Thanks, I’m going to try to catch it. I always like to put faces to names I read about in the news.
They didn’t go into much detail. Other than demonstrating the rattle of a dummy round.
Baldwin said he spent nearly two hours on gun training and safety the first day on set. Standard process for any actor joining a production.
They said Helena was hit under the armpit. Baldwin was aiming off to the side. That shows his training. Even with a cold gun with fake bullets, he knew not to point a gun directly at anyone.
This is the kind of stuff they should make clearer. Like what was her position in regards to Baldwin when she was shot. If she was shot in the armpit, it seems to me she would have been at a right angle to Baldwin. That’s different from earlier reports that said she was shot in the chest or the abdomen. I’m interested if they will put together a computer reenactment that shows the positions of everyone on the set at the time.
All I understand is Baldwin was doing a cross draw, but that doesn’t tell us which way the gun was pointed. I don’t think at this point we even know if Baldwin was head on to the camera or being filmed from his left or right. If it’s true the gun was fired by him lowering the hammer after the the draw, he could have been pointing it right, left or center after they had established the blocking shot.
I’m starting to wonder why I have so much interest in this since it’s movie I would probably never have heard of much less seen. And an actor who’s sole movie I’ve seen is The Hunt For Red October.
No, it means that several people are potentially liable.
The phrase “joint and several liabilty” means that there is a group of people who are jointly liable, and as a group of several people, are individually liable.
The horror! 
Thanks for the info and heads up on it being unlocked in the future.
Aren’t we practically into the realm of ‘distinction without difference,’ though ?
The group is liable vs. the constituents that comprise the group can be liable.
No they didn’t. A key point of movie industry standards is rechecking. If the armorer or the assistant director had actually rechecked the gun before it was handled to Alec they would have found the live bullet. And Alec would never have pointed the gun at Halyna if industry standards were being followed.
But “joint liability” also means that several people are liable, right? Isn’t the distinction that “joint liability” means that every single person is responsible for the entire amount owed, while “several liability” means that each single person is responsible for a part of the liability (because the liability can be “severed” into pieces)? Or (as is quite possible) am I talking through my hat?
I don’t follow. Surely the gun must have been pointed directly at her, unless it was a ricochet or something?
For a simple example, let’s say Rust studio, the armorer and the supplier are sued for negligence or something similar. The jury rules against them and awards the plaintiff $3. Does that mean each party pays one dollar? What if the armorer can’t pay their dollar, does that mean the other two parties pay $1.50 instead?
Is the decision to sue for percentages from each defendant made before the trial starts? Or does percentage of liability only get brought in after a conviction? If that makes any sense to you. 
I know! I’m in my fifties, you’d think I would know everything I needed to by now. 
And a big thanks to you, Northern_Piper, for always popping into threads like this and answering lawyer/law questions. I think you have now officially passed Law & Order shows as the number one source of my legal knowledge.