Authorities issue search warrant for Alec Baldwin's cellphone in connection with fatal shooting

  1. For anyone wondering what they're actually hoping for, they're probably looking for evidence that people were aware of the danger/prior accidents and were recklessly advocating to ignore or disregard the risks. There's a number of factors that cause some to wonder if he could have advocated continuing to film even with the prior misfires and staff walking out in protest. (1) this was a passion project of his on a tight budget with a tight schedule, (2) he was one of the producers on it, and (3) the production company, El Dorado Pictures, was his own production company.

  2. It's probably not meant to find evidence against him as the shooter but instead evidence against him as the producer of a film that had already had issues with firearms safety.

  3. A lot of people are being pretty hard on him for the headline about not pulling the trigger but if you listen to all he said about it, it makes more sense. He was pulling the hammer back on the gun doing a camera check to see how it looked and how the camera picked up the motion, when he released the hammer it swung forward and had enough force to set the primer off in the bullet. Until the hammer is all the way back in some models of revolvers (most will stop at half and/or quarter cock) it will swing back forward, so if you were to let go it could potentially set it off. I can’t say for sure if this was the exact chain of events that happened that day but this was what he was saying in his testimony, and it checks out as a possibility for not pulling the trigger but still firing it.

  4. It's more to see what was said immediately after. I mean, I know you were being sarcastic but they just want to see if anyone said something that could be criminal. That maybe someone on the set doesn't want to get out and in their panicked state said stuff that left a trail.

  5. I bet it’s the shop talk stuff. Requests that were made and either granted or declined via text. The armorer having multiple roles, that sort of thing. He was in charge, they’re gonna put everything they can on him. I assume the word negligence will start getting used a lot.

  6. Things like this tend to be a cover all your bases type of a process. I’m sure theres information the detectives are looking for regarding how the events happened chronologically but also the general awareness of the problems on set, crew walking off, etc.

  7. They probably already know what they are looking for.. just getting collaborative documents to support it

  8. There’s very little legal protection wrt cell phones. It’s mostly up to each individual judge as to how large of a fishing expedition they want to sign off on.

  9. If they can prove he was aware they had been cutting safety corners he can still get nailed to the wall. Emails and text are where to find that kind of evidence.

  10. I can see why the warrant was issued tbh. Alec Baldwin has giving many inconsistent statements, which usually mean someone is not telling the truth. There could be extra info which has not be disclosed in the case so far.

  11. If there was talk between him as a producer and other film execs on safety issues it could be used as evidence of the shit working conditions

  12. A competent crew was fired and replaced with incompetent scabs, one of which is responsible for the death. As Baldwin was also a producer he has some responsibility for creating the dangerous work environment in the first place.

  13. The Armorer made a weird political statement in their defense, and they are also the one who should be 100% responsible for the events. Everyone there trusted the Armrorer to provide blanks.

  14. My understanding is that Baldwin is claiming it was a misfire and he wasn’t intentionally firing the gun. So film tricks wouldn’t do much to have avoided this if true

  15. The Armorer is responsible for the various types of rounds that are on set. This gun was a revolver and I'm assuming that it would not have been loaded with blanks. Being a revolver the gun would probably have been loaded with dummy rounds because the bullet could be seen. A dummy round is a real bullet with the powder removed. I'm assuming that this is where the mistake was made. Someone mixed up the dummy rounds with at least one live round.

  16. Like why is this even a thing? Even if he pulled the trigger he was handed a loaded gun on a movie set that was supposed to be a prop. How does he hold any blame for this?

  17. The fact that someone can pull the trigger of a firearm and kill someone and have people question how they are at all culpable is amazing. People seem to think that job titles somehow excuse basic firearms safety and competency.

  18. Because prop guns are sometimes real guns in which this was for the sake of shooting blanks, he knew that. When you are handed a gun no matter what it is your responsibility. He should have checked it when it was handed to him, he shouldn't have pointed it at anyone, he shouldn't have pulled the trigger. All his fuckups

  19. Production companies are responsible for safety on the set. If the owner of a production company can walk on set and murder someone without consequence, then they aren't being held responsible.

  20. These comments are disgusting. The right wing army really wants this guy to be guilty of intentionally killing someone or mishandling a gun, and seems to celebrate this unfortunate loss of life.

  21. I'd also point out that a lot of the 'authorities' in the region are far-right more often than not. There's certainly no lack of motive when it comes to someone who mocked 'dear leader'.

  22. Funny that people will want someone in jail for doing the same thing if they aren't a beloved celebrity. Point is its manslaughter. It was his job to hire a good prop handler, it was his job to check the firearm, it was his job to not point it at anyone, it was his job to not pull the trigger. His recklessness and negligence killed that person.

  23. The right wing army thinks daddy dumper is the second coming of Jesus, and Baldwin has made fun of dumpy in the past. Even if they knew how to be civil, they wouldn’t in this scenario.

  24. In the military you’re taught that everytime your weapon leaves, then returns to your hands you should be checked the status of the weapon.

  25. Why are you comparing Alec Baldwin to a military trained individual? That’s like comparing a 16-year old fry cook to Gordon Ramsey. Not comparable.

  26. If you and I are on a movie set and the armorer hands you a checked weapon, I will absolutely question the safety of the weapon if you open, manipulate, or check it again. The armorer should also question the safety at that point as they are the individual responsible for gun safety on the set. If an accident happens with that weapon, you are now questionably at fault as you tampered with a cleared firearm.

  27. You don’t follow the same gun safety rules on a movie set because you are going into assuming that the gun is either a prop or not using a live round.

  28. I’ve never owned a revolver but can a revolver go off without pulling the trigger? I feel like there should be some sort of safety stop or something.

  29. Not likely unless you have a wonky bullet, in which case you should properly discard them. A revolver also doesnt fire if the safety is on. Its also, not for all but some, hard to pull q trigger on a revolver, the easiest way is to cock the hammer back qnd it makes the trigger pull super short and easy.

  30. WHERE is the accountability here? Even that female Minnesota cop, Kimberly Potter who pulled the trigger on her gun (mistaking it for a Taser) 'could' go to prison for 15 years due to her reckless actions.

  31. Nobody thinks he did it intentionally, and hopefully that is the case, but what a boob to do four years of Trump is a dope impressions, and then the dude shoots his coworker resulting in a fatality. He truly is done in Hollywood.

  32. I feel like something else is going to come up because of it that's going to get him in trouble. That's just my gut feeling.

  33. He might not be found criminally liable, but he certainly is civilly. He'll likely get sued and lose a wrongful death lawsuit.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may have missed