Comments by "SmallSpoonBrigade" (@SmallSpoonBrigade) on "Why Alec Baldwin's Confession will send him to Jail. Charges Filed." video.

@Olsenator That reminds me of the actor that fatally shot himself in the head with a gun full of blanks. He put the thing far too close and the discharge, without a bullet, was sufficient to kill him. The last thing we need is to have people that might not be familiar with these firearms messing with ones that an expert is supposed to have checked on a set where there's supposed to be no live rounds.
3
@charlesmurphy1510 It's common knowledge and there have been people with knowledge saying as much. You wouldn't want actors to be checking anyways as they're not required to be experts and telling dummy rounds from live rounds isn't always easy. Having a non-expert check the gun under those circumstances isn't necessarily going to make things safer. It just adds another set of hands to screw things up.
2
@dalepettit6799 That doesn't mean that there weren't dummy rounds in it. If you're going to film that angle of a pistol, you may well see that the gun isn't loaded if there isn't something in there, that's the whole point of having them for scenes other than when you're loading it. Shy of weighing them, I'm not sure how he'd know if they were real or not. Plus, there weren't supposed to be any live rounds on the set at all specifically to avoid having any of them wind up in the gun.
1
@SH-jr6qt I don't agree, but that's neither here nor there, it's going to depend upon what the jury finds, but I don't think that it's a clear cut case and decent attorneys should be able to deal with the issue. Without knowing how the rounds got into the gun and why they were even on set, it's going to be a harder case to try and win.
1
From what I understand they don't know how the bullet got into the gun. They don't know why there was live ammo on set at all and couldn't be bothered to do any of that work. If that's accurate, it's going to damage the prosecution's case substantially. I don't know if he was even allowed to check the weapon after the armorer had checked it. Not that checking it might have made much of a difference as dummy rounds can look very realistic. With so much of the negligence being spread amongst multiple people, I don't see how they'll meet the standard of guilty beyond a reasonable doubt for him as he just pulled the trigger based on what appears to be a good faith belief that it had been checked and was told which direction to point it and what to do with it.
1
Probably not, but we'll see. In pretty much any other situation, that would be the case, but this isn't one of those cases. You don't want a non-expert to be messing with a prop gun specifically because they can introduce their own mistakes to a weapon that's supposed to have been checked by an expert. We'll see where this is going, but I don't see the behavior as being sufficient to rise to a guilty verdict just on the basis of what is publicly known. There's just too many people that made too many mistakes and from what I understand, the police haven't bothered to figure out where the rounds came from and how they got into the gun. Which if that is accurate, the defense is going to have a field day with as those are completely relevant. This isn't a parent at home who is the only person that could check, this is an actor who shouldn't have had ammo on the set at all. Not at all the same thing.
1