Hmmm...
Lots of misunderstandings/misconceptions here. So, of course, I'll throw my two cents in. Keeping in mind, of course, that I ain't not no bambalance chaser.
There are firearms safety procedures for movie sets. And NO, they're NOT "the four rules" we talk about here. Why would they not be? For the simple fact that IT'S A MOVIE SET AND MOVIES OFTEN FILM SCENES WHICH ARE BLATANT VIOLATIONS OF THE FOUR RULES.
WE have "four rules". THEY have a whole list of safety rules and procedures because they WILL be firing guns in all kinds of ways which will violate those four rules of ours. It's important enough for them that they're SUPPOSED to have a property master or armorer who ensures all these rules are followed and enforced.
Interestingly, one of those safety rules of theirs is "Never point a firearm at anyone including yourself. Always cheat the shot by aiming to the right or left of the target character. If asked to point and shoot directly at a living target, consult with the property master or armorer for the prescribed safety procedures."
And, of course, "Live ammunition may not be brought into the theatre".
We know the potential consequences if we violate the "four rules". Well, everybody on a movie set is ALSO supposed to know the potential consequences if ANYBODY on the set violates any of THEIR rules. Even if live ammunition is never in the picture at all, prop ammunition can STILL cause serious injury or even death. Jon-Erik Hexum famously killed himself via a blank gunshot to the head on the set of Cover Up in 1984. He had loaded blank cartridges into his .44 magnum revolver and LITERALLY started goofing around with the gun between takes by removing 5, spinning the cylinder, and placing the revolver against his temple and then pulled the trigger, ala Russian Roulette.
Turned out the .44 magnum blank was powerful enough to blow a chunk of his skull into his brain.
Now...who is to blame for the Rust incident?
The answer to this is "EVERYBODY WHO HAD A ROLE IN ENSURING THE SAFETY PROCEDURES WERE IN PLACE AND FOLLOWED."
This isn't a "one person shoulders all the blame" thing. The armorer had a role. Alec Baldwin had a role. Halyna Hutchins had a role. The people who brought live ammo onto the set had a role. The people who apparently used live ammo in the gun to go out and have shooting fun with the prop gun had a role. The people who knew about ANY of these things had a role.
Who gets held responsible? Good question, especially given the fact that there are a great many people who played a role in this. There isn't a simple, easy answer to this and quite honestly, there will likely be a whole host of people who will never be charged with anything, much less convicted, for their personal roles in the matter. How many of the people who knew someone was actually bringing and firing live rounds from the prop gun do you think will be charged with anything?
The government will focus on the big picture: Who committed the homicide and who should be held responsible for it? Obviously, Alec and Hannah are front and center in this. But, as you can see by my comments above, there are a whole lotta people who were responsible for a whole lotta violations leading up to this tragic event.
Undoubtedly, there will be civil law suits involved in this as well, which again will very likely focus on the two main characters: Alec and Hannah.
A homicide was committed. Homicide being the killing of one person by another. There are many forms homicide can take, both criminal and non-criminal. A non-criminal homicide example would be the killing of another as the result of deadly force used in self-defense which is covered by the statues dealing with the use of deadly force. In such an example, this would be "justifiable homicide". Murder is one form of criminal homicide. So is manslaughter, unintentional homicide, and various shades of each under the jurisdictional laws.
Alec Baldwin apparently meets the wickets to be charged with involuntary manslaughter. Manslaughter IS NOT MURDER. It is the unlawful killing of a human being without malice, consisting of manslaughter committed in the commission of an unlawful act not amounting go felony, or in the commission of a lawful act which might produce death in an unlawful manner or without due caution and circumspection.
If the safety rules in place defined a personal responsibility to Alec Balwin as the person handling a firearm prop on set, then he meets a very important wicket to be charged with this: "...without due caution and circumspection".
Example (hypothetical postulating here, as I don't actually know all the rules which were in place on the set):
- The armorer must personally obtain, inspect, and load any prop gun prior to its use on set.
- The actor must receive a safety brief from the armorer prior to handling a firearm prop.
- The actor must inspect the firearm prop immediately upon receipt, verify it's properly loaded with prop ammunition, and must not allow the firearm prop to leave his possession at any time before returning it to the armorer.
OK...let's say that the above are three hypothetical movie set rules out of however many.
- If the armorer (Hannah) did not personally obtain, inspect, and load the prop gun prior to use on set, or if she failed to properly do so, then she is in violation of that rule. (For example, if someone else loaded the firearm and she didn't personally verify it. If she loaded the firearm prop with the wrong ammunition. If she loaded it, but then left it unattended for a period of time, and then did not personally verify it again.)
- If the actor (Alec) did not receive a safety brief from Hannah prior to handling/taking possession of the firearm prop, then they are BOTH in violation of this rule and BOTH share culpability. (Both, because they both know there are rules that must be followed on set to use firearms. If Hannah did not give the brief, Alec should have asked for it.)
- If Alec did not inspect the firearm prop immediately upon receipt to verify it was properly loaded with prop ammunition and/or did not have the firearm prop in his possession at all times, then Alec is in violation of this rule. (One could say that Hannah has some responsibility here to verify Alec did this, but then she could have observed Alec perform an inspection and Alec was careless in paying attention while he did so.)
If these hypothetical rules were in place, then Alec most definitely meets the wickets to be charged with involuntary manslaughter.
Hannah, however, does not. This is because she was not the one who actually committed the physical act which fired the gun.
This does not mean she is not liable or culpable at all, because it's HER responsibility as armorer to ensure ALL the firearms rules and procedures are in place and followed at all times. She would be charged separately.
NOW...about the politics in this:
Yes, there are those who are politically motivated in this, on both sides. But the fact is that Alec (and Hannah) should be charged and tried in accordance with the laws, regardless.
That means if Alec goes to court and is convicted of involuntary manslaughter, this would be a fourth degree felony with a maximum punishment of 18 months in prison and up to $5,000 in fines.
If he gets sentenced in accordance with the NM sentencing guidelines, then he "didn't get off". Yeah, he'll probably have paid FAR more in putting up a legal defense than any possible fine. He'll probably pay FAR more than any prison time he may or may not get, even if he gets the maximum. An actor who killed someone on set, then goes about trying to blame everybody EXCEPT himself for it is gonna burn him in the industry FAR more than the courts will.
And yes, we all know there can be all kinds of scenarios which might happen, from nothing to maximum. I'm not going to entertain this, because we all know that untold thousands of "every day people" get all kinds of plea deals every day of the year which amount to a range of nothing to maximum. Criminals get firearms charges dropped. Sentences and fines get reduced. Alternative punishments offered in place of jail time. Dismissal of all charges. Treatment programs in place of fines/jail time. You name it, it happens all the time.
