-
Why does the media keep referring to Alec Baldwin shooting and killing Halyna Hutchins as an “accident?” Isn’t it up to a jury to decide if it was an accidental shooting or murder?
-
Does Alec Baldwin usually point his gun at a person, and fire it, when it isn’t part of the script? Between filming he just randomly points the gun at people and blows off blanks? Has he done that before?
-
Why would he point the gun at the camera lady and fire it??
It being accidental or not is irrelevant. I believe what he did constitutes what is called “negligent homicide”, where he was aware that someone was possibly in his way, and by not using proper caution, caused an accident and the death of that person. So, basically, his actions were, in the legal sense, negligent, because they amounted to a careless and/or reckless disregard of another person’s life. I believe to some extent he is criminally liable and should be punished for what he did.
I heard a comment on TV that the first day on the job for Halyna, Alec took her to dinner that evening. Really?
Does the star of the show usually take the new camera lady to dinner the first night?
There’s more to this story than “accidental shooting.” Since when does the actor just randomly point a gun at a camera lady and fire off what is supposed to be a blank round? Even if he really did think it was a blank, does he usually just fire blanks in between filming? No way! I speculate that she had something on him and he wanted her silenced. Maybe some kind of sexual thing or affair gone wrong. Make it look like an accident.
Who put the live round in the gun? Where did it come from?
in america, the cops decide whether to even arrest someone, then after that the DA decides what charged if any, to proceed with. juries only decide matters of fact. so if the facts aren’t in dispute, and the actions given that fact don’t constitute a crime in the eyes of the DA, then it’s not a crime.
In America, if you shoot and kill someone, and you are known to be the shooter, then you go to jail (If you are not one of the lucky ones to be above the law, read rich and famous are above the law).
You are presumed innocent until found guilty in a court of law, while you sit in jail and await your trial.
He should be sitting in jail awaiting his trial, because he shot and killed someone, and he is the known shooter.
A jury decides if he is guilty of some degree of murder or manslaughter,or not, or if it was an “accidental” shooting.
But since he is rich and famous, he is not in jail awaiting his trial.
I repeat, he SHOT AND KILLED someone. That is a fact!
not true at all. nearly everyone gets out on bail. it’s only a small percentage of people who can’t make bail who have to await trial inside.
off the top of my head i can think of at least a half dozen people that i know who have shot someone, and only 1 of them actually went to jail, and he did 2 years. now another guy i know stabbed someone like 30 times, back when i was a teenager, he got life no parole, but it was so obvious that he did it and he told the judge that he was on drugs and didn’t know what he was doing, which is not a defense, so he went to prison.
i was charged with a crime that carried a sentence of minimum of 10, up to 99 years in prison, and i was only in jail for about 3 hours or so. 3 years in court and i didn’t have to sit in jail at all.
if someone was there who had the job of managing the guns on set, they maybe they’re the ones who are guilty of negligent homicide.
Again, the POOR sit in jail and await their trial. Bail is a BS loophole for the rich to wait for their trial at home.
He shot and killed someone, and that is against the law. He should be sitting in jail. It is his defense lawyer’s job to defend him by saying he is not guilty of murder because he didn’t know there was a live round in the gun. Because if he DID know there was a live round in the gun, and he pointed at Halyna and fired the gun, that is MURDER! He should be sitting in jail waiting to prove he didn’t know there was a live round in the gun.
yeah cash bail is bullshit.
but shooting and killing someone, in and of itself, is not against the law. the definitions for murder, manslaughter, and reckless homicide don’t entail every instance of a person being shot and killed.
the defense lawyer only comes into play if the DA decides there is a crime. then a grand jury has to indict, then you can have a trial.
it’s like you’re ignoring the fact that this was on a movie set, that his job was to point and shoot the gun, and that someone else was responsible for the safety of the weapons, an expert no less.
why are you ignoring those facts?
you know the cops saw the video in the aubrey case and so did the DA and for months they all agreed that those 3 didn’t do anything wrong? it wasn’t until the press got the tape that something actually happened.
It was NOT in the script to point a gun at the camera person and fire the weapon. They were not filming. He simply pointed a gun at a person and fired it, off script.
The FACT is that he pointed a gun at her and fired the weapon. Why did he do that? Did he know the gun was loaded with a live round? Where did the round come from and who put it in the weapon? These are questions that need to be answered in court! Who the heck is the DA to refuse to press charges on the shooting and killing of another human being? Another loophole for the people he doesn’t want to see convicted of murder? What a BS System!
DAs do this all the time. Remember Darren Wilson? Or the 3 guys in the Aubrey case? At least someone from the DAs office in the Aubrey case is charged now for it. Are you glad that they woman in the Aubrey case has been charged?
Again, it’s a BULLSHIT system. Some DA is the sole deciding factor on who gets charged and who walks. That is BULLSHIT! The crime was commited, he shot and killed someone. He can have his day in court with lawyer proving his stupidity, or ignorance. He has a right to a trial and defense, showing he really was ignorant and stupid to point a gun at someone and pull the trigger, whether he thought it was loaded or not. It is not up to a single crooked DA to select who goes to trial and who doesn’t, that’s BS! That is a corrupt system. Alec should be sitting in jail awaiting his day in court, with his defense team.
so you’re against prosecutorial discretion?
That is a loophole to insert corruption into an already corrupt system. If a person shoots and kills someone, the known shooter should be sitting in jail and awaiting his day in court.
Why should one person decide the fate of the shooter, simply because he believes it was an accident, or that he might not have enough evidence to win a case? What, is he a pre judge and jury, deciding who stays in jail and who goes free? NO! That is for a JURY to decide if it was murder or an “accident.”
i mean this case is as good as it gets when it comes to reasons why what you’re suggesting might not ought be the case.
he’s on a film set and there are professionals there who have the job of making sure the guns are in order. dozens of witnesses. probably film of it.
i think maybe those people should get in trouble and if im not mistaken there has at least been talk of charges for them.
would you include cops in your plan?
why the hard on for baldwin?
i feel like you aren’t really up to speed on how the criminal justice system actually works in america.
are you american?
The people responsible for the guns/gun safety on the set did not put the live round in the gun. Duh? Are you suggesting that one of them put the live round in the gun??
WHERE DID THE LIVE ROUND COME FROM?
WHO LOADED THE LIVE ROUND IN THE GUN?
Suppose the people responsible for the gun/safety on the set did their job properly, and Alec brought a live round to the set, and once he had the gun HE loaded the live round in the gun? You are suggesting that the people responsible for gun safety on the set are responsible for that? You are out of your mind!
I am saying that it’s a possibility that they did their job properly, but Alec brought to the set, and loaded a live round in the gun and MURDERED her.
Who the heck is a DA to rule out murder? That is for a JURY to decide.
how do you know who put the round in the gun or not?
im suggesting that the people in charge of the guns were responsible for the guns. not the guy who was hired to act.
this all seems so common sense to me. what’s the sticking point for you?
you seem to be suggesting that rather than going with the obvious explanation, that we jail someone on a bunch of speculation. weird.