Alec Baldwin sued by family of cinematographer he killed

Originally published at: Alec Baldwin sued by family of cinematographer he killed | Boing Boing


Saw that coming.


Not taking sides, but how is that reenactment video supposed to be incriminating? Isn’t it just showing what Baldwin was supposed to be doing? The scene called for him to draw his gun and fire it toward the camera.


Even if Baldwin the actor didn’t do something wrong (which is still unknown until we hear back about the functionality of the firearm), Baldwin the producer is liable because he created and/or allowed an unsafe set to exist.


Perhaps Alec Baldwin the actor “seems an innocent (albeit still breathing) victim of someone else’s mistake,” but Alec Baldwin the producer may well be responsible for cutting corners on safety.


The NRA terrorist organization is unusually silent.


Scene didn’t call for firing the gun, according to that lawsuit and many previous reports.

Also, Baldwin didn’t pull the trigger. He pulled the hammer back for the shot, then let go of the hammer and the round discharged.


From what I gather, there were many layers of safety that were omitted/violated.
Live rounds on the set, guns not secured when not in use, armorer not in the loop when firearms were handed off, and the set had firearms known to go off unintentionally - all stuff that should not have been allowed. Looks to be a workplace culture issue where safety is viewed as an expense and not a priority. Issues such as this are typically a result of the expectations set by leadership. I see that Alec is not alone; the other producers are being sued as well.


That makes sense. But it doesn’t make that cgi animation make any more sense. It’s still just animating what he was supposed to be doing. They should be making an animation of whatever they are claiming was the negligent behavior.


Which unless the pistol in question was worn out, broken, modified or defective is not possible given the design of that particular single action revolver. There are multiple safety catches that prevent the gun from firing simply from the hammer not being drawn all the way to the fully cocked position.


I mean, I agree. The animation alone doesn’t really say anything. Perhaps later they will add additional commentary.

1 Like

Does an 1880 have a half cock?


It should, as well as any modern replica.

It is hard to get specific about everything with out knowing the exact model. A single action revolver should not go off with the hammer released. It may go off if either the person has their finger on the trigger, even if they do not realize this, or there is something mechanically wrong with the firearm. I wrote a big long post previously on what could go wrong.

The investigation should show the latter, and perhaps the actual footage, if the cameras were rolling, will show the former.


I mean, congrats to whoever got paid for that recreation, get that money, but I don’t understand the point. There’s no way any competent lawyer would ever let that be shown to jurors. It just makes the family look like they’re trying to railroad Baldwin.

I only know that’s what Baldwin and the AD, Halls, have both said.

Animations are allowed in court all the time:

I could see this having been made by a news organization, but it seems very peculiar if this was made and distributed by the plantiffs. Is this the future? With lawyers waging an all-out PR campaign in social media before the trial? (Something seems off about this…)

Yeah, Baldwin/Actor was always going to be named in the suir. But it’s Baldwin/Producer who is really on the hook.

Both sides need to stop this, else it will undermine any chance of a legal determination.

This topic was automatically closed after 5 days. New replies are no longer allowed.