Comments by "MarcosElMalo2" (@MarcosElMalo2) on "LegalEagle" channel.

@archiedentone5950 That’s not entirely true. It IS true on a production like this, a Western with many actors portraying armed characters. Not so much on a production with a gun in a single scene—having a dedicated armorer is certainly an option, if the property master doesn’t have any experience or training with on-set firearms and practical effects. Many do have such training and experience. That said, many productions will hire an armorer for the day in such a situation, or only for those days they’re required. I’d agree with you in the case of this production or any production that had a half dozen or more actors using firearms through various scenes. In fact, on some productions, the armorer has their own assistant or multiple assistants to help keep track of all weapon props, whether or not they’re functioning firearms. Edit: Also, where did you hear that the property master quit with the others (from the camera department). I haven’t seen any mention of this. The only crew members that quit, according to every report that mentions it, were members of the camera department. I’ve only seen the property master mentioned once, in the L.A. Times chronology of events, and it said nothing about her quitting the show.
19
@johnbaker4246 wow, you were an awesome kid. Congratulations on being able to do at that age what most people can’t even do as adults. You’re very very special. Have a cookie and a parade. That said, you’re not being reasonable about this. You’re confusing “should” with either the way things really are or with criminal laws that govern gun possession. That said, Alec Baldwin has moral guilt he will carry with him for the rest of his life, and he knows it. Even if the fault for the accident lies with others, he knows he could have easily prevented it by checking the weapon himself.
19
@stepanova8 Also, if the new recordings are causing financial pain to Wall Street bros, objectively they sound better. That’s just science.
13
@Angela-lp3lz My speculation—she was bulldozed into not following protocol by the A.D. and her direct supervisor, the property master due to her inability to assert herself. Part of protocol as I understand it is that the armorer checks the weapon in front of the actor, showing the actor that the gun is loaded, loaded with blanks, or loaded with dummy bullets. I’ve never seen the A.D. perform this function. So I can imagine the A.D. usurping the armorer because he was hurrying the production, taking the weapon from the armorer’s cart, doing his faulty check, and handing it to the actor before the armorer was aware of what was going on. Ideally (and professionally), the armorer would call a halt loudly so she could personally check the weapon in front of the actor before personally handing it to the actor. Being assertive about your responsibilities is part of the job, especially when those responsibilities include on set safety.
13
@daviddebroux4708 He was a talented Austrian painter, and I mean really talented. He could knock out a two bedroom apartment in a single day. Two coats.
11
Do you mean appearances on behalf of themselves and to spout their opinions, or on behalf of clients, to get the clients’ stories out to the public? Because the latter type of appearance is perfectly kosher.
7
@autumnberend828 A frikkin’ casino, though? Bankruptcy isn’t a common business practice. It happens when a company is mismanaged or when unforeseen circumstances (for example, a spike in input cost, major changes in regulations, or natural disaster) arise. Trump mismanaged his casinos, over-leveraged them, and was unable to make interest payments. Do you know how hard it is for a casino to lose money?
6
If you’re referring to the 18 minute gap in the tapes, I have some thoughts. Material on the rest of the tapes that Nixon turned over was damning enough to warrant both political impeachment/conviction, and criminal indictment/conviction. They had Nixon dead to rights. But a deal was made (or the fix was in, if you prefer). Nixon resigned without putting up a fuss and his successor (Ford) pardoned him, protecting him from criminal prosecution. So what does this have to do with the 18-minutes? I’d like to suggest some possibilities. First of all, it is quite possible that the 18-minutes contained national security information that was so sensitive that it not only had to be redacted, but the redaction also had to be concealed. Second, it’s possible that the 18-minutes contained non-criminal but embarrassing or scandalous material. Lastly, we should consider the possibility(and most unlikely one, but still a possibility) that the 18-minutes were erased accidentally. 😂 I don’t know if Nixon was a better criminal than Trump. He was certainly smarter—he made a deal and avoided criminal charges. At the time, most people thought it was a good deal all around. It would spare the country a traumatic trial if Nixon would just resign in disgrace, get the hell out of DC, and quietly hide in San Clemente. Trump could have made a deal in 2001, returning the documents and flipping on his January 6th co-conspirators. Hahahaha, who am I kidding? Trump is too dumb to ever make a deal that involved admitting he was wrong.
6
@meghanhenderson6682 I could see cocaine, but I could also see it as him getting high on himself. Possibly he has undiagnosed mania.
5
@jennyanydots2389 The freedom to have an Icee. Damn, the machine’s broke again.
4
@lluewhyn A tangent to your tangent: there’s this thing in Hollywood called the C-47. It’s a simple clothespin, and is quite useful for clipping two things together temporarily. It’s considered an expendable. But why not just call it a clothespin? A clever and dishonest production manager started putting the renamed item as a line item in the production budget. And he greatly inflated the price. And then he formed a side company that would sell “C-47s” at these inflated prices to the production. Imagine buying a thing for 5¢ and then charging much more. Multiply by a thousand for each production you’re budgeting.
4
@abraxaszee8953 Yes. Think of being full of yourself—we all get this once in a while, and we learn to get down from it. But now imagine someone who can’t get down, who keeps feeding that ego until it collapses like a black whole. He’s trying so hard to prevent that collapse, of course he thinks he’s the greatest lawyer in the world, and of course he’s going to represent himself. I have no doubt that he has a very intelligent mind, but smart people are not excluded from the Dunning–Krueger effect.
4
What strike? A handful of crew members quitting does not constitute a strike. Nor did they quit over lack of safety protocols. They quit over working conditions—some of which do affect crew safety, such as provisions for local lodging. There are opposing sides to this: the crew members who quit claim that they had an agreement for the lodging, the producers claim there was no agreement. There is another issue with your wording. There wasn’t a “lack of safety protocols”. There was a lack of following them or laxness of enforcing them. The two people with responsibility to follow and enforce were the A.D. and the armorer—and possibly the property master, who should have backed up the armorer if the A.D. was interfering with the armorer doing her job. But main the point is this: you’re incorrect about the facts of the case and it’s unclear if you understand standard operational procedure of a set. However, YOU ARE CORRECT that this tragic accident occurred because of deviation from S.O.P. that is there for a reason.
3
I think the legal term for uncovering and taking hidden or transferred assets is “disgorgement”.
3
@ninjabearpress2574 I agree he should have. BUT show me the criminal code that requires this. Such a law wouldn’t survive a 2nd amendment challenge. Baldwin might be liable for a civil claim (where the victims, their families, or their estates sue for damages), but he didn’t violate any criminal laws. So, there’s a good chance he will pay part of a civil claim if he is named in it (in addition to other responsible parties, including the insurer of the production). In fact, I bet he will settle and avoid trial if it comes to this. I think the worst thing he will suffer is the knowledge that he accidentally killed a friend and colleague, and that he could have easily prevented the accident. He’s going to carry that the rest of his life, and that moral guilt is worse than any damages he has to pay.
2
@Cooplander There hasn’t even been a strike, either by IATSE or by the workers on this production. A handful of workers quitting is NOT a strike. IATSE leadership is waiting for member ratification or rejection of the negotiated contract, and that contract negotiation was not directly related to the workers quitting—their reason for quitting was unfulfilled promises of lodging/breach of an agreement they claim they had with the producers. (I tend to believe them, but who knows?) I think it’s important that we don’t obfuscate or confuse different issues here. And I repeat, there was no strike on the production of Rust, nor has IATSE declared a strike (yet).
2
@tracyhaverstick5672 There was no strike and there hasn’t been a strike. If you’re referring to the production, some workers quit in what was a dispute over lodging—one side arguing it was promised, the other side arguing it wasn’t. Quitting is not a strike. If you’re referring to the union IATSE, there still hasn’t been a strike. Membership voted in favor of a strike authorization to help them in contract negotiations. Those negotiations have been completed, and now membership must vote to ratify or reject the new contract.
2
Forrest Santos. Run, Forrest, run! Run for Congress!
2
The double standard sucks, but the fact is that there is good reason to tread carefully with an ex-president running for office. These criminal prosecutions against a former president are unprecedented. No, it shouldn’t matter in an ideal world. But it does matter. M
2
@sioward2753 Even better, thanks to post production costs coming way down, you can do this using a green screen to get the timing exactly right. Film the actor against a green screen, shooting blanks. Later, your second unit films the background with the squib practical effects timed to the first sequence. This is probably the cheaper and more efficient method than trying to time it live.
2
😂 lol, it’s true!
2
@5had0wbaNNed wrong
1
@TheChrisLeone Nope.
1
I yelled “Theater!” in a crowded firehouse.
1
I did not know the Federalist was still a news commentary and analysis magazine. I thought it had pivoted to fashion and lifestyle.
1
@rickedwards7276 There was no official representative of the bank called to testify. The defense witnesses that worked for the bank did not have the authority to speak for the bank. Only a bank chairman of the board, president, CEO, or CFO could testify on behalf of the bank or the bank’s owners. And it’s highly doubtful that they would say it’s OK to submit falsified documents when applying for a loan—it wouldn’t be in the best interest of either the company or shareholders (and would open them up to shareholder lawsuits for gross mismanagement.)
1
⁠⁠⁠ @danielelkadi3499 You clearly aren’t following the story, either. X-itter is a private company. It’s not a publicly traded company. The outside investors ponied up about $7 billion and Musk covered the rest. The OP is mistaken that the investors have a motion to file. They don’t understand the law, let alone financial law. Musk’s partners don’t have recourse to the SEC and it’s unlikely that a civil case would go anywhere if they thought they had a cause of action against Musk. The handful of individuals and funds that joined Musk to acquire Twitter have seen the value of their investment evaporate. “Musk has made a lot of money for his investors” is irrelevant to this story, because he and his partners are losing billions of dollars of value, and it shows up in financial statements and filings, such as Fidelity taking a write down on their investment. I don’t know if you’re a Musk family member or a Musk worshipper, but you need to find another angle to love.
1
If a person thinks that the only options to opt out of public school are expensive, they are lazy. There is nothing stopping communities from setting up their own cooperatives to provide low cost or free alternative schools that would meet federal and state requirements. Parental rights advocates go too far, and they interfere with the purported rights of other parents. They seem to be in favor of their “rights” and theirs alone. Anyone else can go to heck. That’s the ethical and moral development of a toddler. It’s not just extremism, it’s selfish extremism. Parental Rights advocates often make the tax payer argument, too. The tax payer argument doesn’t hold. People without children must still pay the taxes that pay for education. Shouldn’t they have equal say in matters of education? Whoops, there goes the parental rights argument. We should all have an equal right to determine how our tax dollars are spent on education, regardless of whether or not we have children. 😄
1
Yacarino doesn’t have all the powers of a normal CEO? Child, she doesn’t even have the powers of a normal person to dress herself.
1
I’m a Lard(@ss)
1
@QemeH What’s the legal code making negligent discharge a crime? I’m pretty certain there is none. It wouldn’t survive a constitutional challenge. Unless you can prove Baldwin knew the gun was loaded (not “should have” or “should have assumed”), the criminal case here is non-existent. There is a possible civil case, and there is the Moral Guilt that Baldwin will carry with him for the rest of his life. Maybe you think there should be laws governing gun safety (such as checking the chamber(s), magazines, etc.) or requiring safety training or licensing as a condition of ordinary firearm ownership. Such laws don’t survive 2nd amendment challenges.
1
She’s kind of the Joni Mitchell of her generation and I think her best days are yet to come.
1
What’s that about self-discovery? Avenatti is suing himself now?
1
@johnm.3279 Why can’t they? Do you think you lose your constitutional rights if you form a corporation or a special district? Don’t be silly.
1
@CAP198462 Urine trouble for being a wiz-ard.
1