Rust shooting-It's not over

[Tex Jones, SASS 2263]

  From CNN:

Independent testing on the weapon used in the fatal 2021 shooting on the set of the film “Rust” shows the trigger had to be pulled, the gun fired normally and it did not malfunction, according to a report filed in court, raising the possibility charges could be refiled against actor Alec Baldwin.

“The fired evidence cartridge is the consequence of a normal hammer fall from the fully cocked position of the hammer,” the report compiled by Forensic Science Services of Arizona states.

The report was filed as part of a defense motion on behalf of the film’s armorer, Hannah Gutierrez Reed, who is charged with tampering with the gun used in the shooting as well as two counts of involuntary manslaughter.

 

Baldwin has maintained he pulled back the gun’s hammer as far as he could without cocking the gun and released the hammer – but did not pull the trigger. CNN’s calls to him for comment on the report were not immediately returned

The October 2021 shooting on a New Mexico film set killed cinematographer Halyna Hutchins and injured director Joel Souza. They were struck by a live round of ammunition fired from a prop gun held by Baldwin while rehearsing a scene, officials have said.

The new testing by examiners in New Mexico was conducted using a replacement “hammer, trigger/sear and bolt,” according to their report, rather than the gun’s original components. The weapon – broken during tests run by the FBI and inoperable when Forensic Science Services got it – then was returned to operable condition.

Involuntary manslaughter charges against Baldwin lodged in January were dismissed in April, when special prosecutors Kari Morrissey and Jason Lewis said charges could be refiled. A final decision has not been made, Morrissey told CNN on Wednesday.

“The charges against Alec Baldwin were dismissed without prejudice because a possible malfunction of the gun significantly affects causation with regard to Baldwin, not with regard to Gutierrez. If it is determined that the gun did not malfunction, charges against Mr. Baldwin will proceed,” with “a final charging decision … within the next sixty days,” prosecutors said in a June court filing.

If a new charge is filed against Baldwin, the actor’s defense team likely would focus on the structural integrity of the gun at the time of the shooting

“Although Alec Baldwin repeatedly denies pulling the trigger, given the tests, findings and observations reported here, the trigger had to be pulled or depressed sufficiently to release the fully cocked or retracted hammer of the evidence revolver,” the report states.

“If the hammer had not been fully retracted to the rear and were to slip from the handler’s thumb without the trigger depressed, the half cock or quarter cock notches in the hammer should have prevented the firing pin from reaching any cartridge in the firing chamber,” it reads.

“From an examination of the fired cartridge case and the operationally restored evidence revolver, this fatal incident was the consequence of the hammer being manually retracted to its fully rearward and cocked position followed, at some point, by the pull or rearward depression of the trigger,” the report said.

“The only conceivable alternative to the foregoing would be a situation in which the trigger was already pulled or held rearward while retracting the hammer to its full cock position. Although unlikely and totally contrary to the normal operation of these single action revolvers, such improper handling, would result in the discharge of a live cartridge,” it added.

Investigators have not determined how and why live rounds were on the set of the movie.

 

 

 

[bgavin]

All the above proves the liberal elite are above the justice applied to the little people.

 

[PowderRiverCowboy]

10 minutes ago, bgavin said:

All the above proves the liberal elite are above the justice applied to the little  people.

 

Fixed it for you:)

[Crooked River Pete, SASS 43485]

1 hour ago, Tex Jones, SASS 2263 said:

The new testing by examiners in New Mexico was conducted using a replacement “hammer, trigger/sear and bolt,” according to their report, rather than the gun’s original components. The weapon – broken during tests run by the FBI and inoperable when Forensic Science Services got it – then was returned to operable condition.

Sounds like a worthless test to me.

[Red Gauntlet , SASS 60619]

17 minutes ago, Crooked River Pete, SASS 43485 said:

Sounds like a worthless test to me.

 

No kidding. A test on what amounts to a completely different firearm.

[Tex Jones, SASS 2263]

This from the Fox News report:

 

The new report by the special prosecutors' experts echoes a similar conclusion as the FBI forensics analysis, which was released in August 2022.

The FBI performed an accidental discharge test and found that the gun used in the fatal shooting of Hutchins "could not be made to fire without a pull of the trigger," according to the report obtained by ABC News.

The test showed that if the revolver's hammer was in the quarter or half-cocked positions, the gun would not fire. When the hammer was in the fully cocked position, the gun "could not be made to fire without a pull of the trigger while the working internal components were intact and functional."

[bgavin]

So the FBI broke the gun with their drop tests.

[Pat Riot]

Why would the FBI conduct a drop test? The gun did not go off by Baldwin dropping it. 

 

Finding

Baldwin 

Innocent
 

[Eyesa Horg]

Follow the money . He really needs to meet Bubba.

[Presidio]

17 minutes ago, Pat Riot said:

Why would the FBI conduct a drop test? The gun did not go off by Baldwin dropping it. 

 

Finding

Baldwin 

Innocent
 

They probably ran it through all kinds of scenarios testing and trying to make it fire in a manner inconsistent with the normal operating manner of the pistol.

 

So yeah, they more'n likely busted some parts doing it.  But now, the original evidence is destroyed being replaced with a repaired weapon.  How's this gonna hold up in court now?

[Eyesa Horg]

As planned, can't prove now that the gun was fine when AB fired it. Benefit of the doubt goes to the shooter.  

[Henry T Harrison]

No matter what the condition of the gun it was pointed in an unsafe direction 

[Cypress Sun]

29 minutes ago, Presidio said:

 

  How's this gonna hold up in court now?

 

It won't. Baldwin walks and still makes movies with firearms.

 

Reed will take the entire blame, not that she wasn't partially to blame.

 

I have a hard time believing that the gun just conveniently "broke". 

[Pat Riot]

48 minutes ago, Presidio said:

They probably ran it through all kinds of scenarios testing and trying to make it fire in a manner inconsistent with the normal operating manner of the pistol.

 

So yeah, they more'n likely busted some parts doing it.  But now, the original evidence is destroyed being replaced with a repaired weapon.  How's this gonna hold up in court now?

Maybe this will sound a bit nutty, but maybe it failed on purpose. Not regarding the douchebag and his guilt, but so one federal agency can report to another federal agency that Italian imports are not robust enough to be safe for future import. 
 

 

[Texas Joker]

I believe the relevant phrase is '' in performance of destructive testing

 

 

[Pat Riot]

14 minutes ago, Cypress Sun said:

 

I have a hard time believing that the gun just conveniently "broke". 

Same here. 
 

On another note, I have a hard time trusting any group that thinks wind-breakers are cool and command authority. They ain’t right in the head…collectively. 

[Creeker, SASS #43022]

3 hours ago, Henry T Harrison said:

No matter what the condition of the gun it was pointed in an unsafe direction 

Can we get over this point?

It was a movie set - land of MAKE BELIEVE.

Firearms are pointed in unsafe directions all the time on movie sets.

 

It would be challenging to create a visually exciting narrative AND abide by REAL WORLD safety rules.

 

Thats why they have procedures, armorers and gun wranglers to ensure that conditions are kept "safe" for these types of gun handling.

 

The person who brought and introduced live ammo into the equation - the person(s) who ignored or bypassed industry safety norms is/ are the person(s) at fault - regardless of your personal feelings about Reed, Baldwin or liberal hollywood elites.

 

We ALL know that the firearm operated as designed - the hammer was cocked, the trigger pulled and the firearm discharged.

 

That is not the sin - without the live ammo being present; this tragedy would not have occurred. 

And again; anyone who has spent any time on a set or within ANY industry where an assigned safety official oversees an operation knows full well that AFTER the safety official designates a situation or piece of equipment "hot" or "cold" - the handler is NEVER empowered to adjust, handle or mess with the item.

 

This protocol exists to create a chain of custody and control and have a "trusted, accredited" person of responsibility performing the oversight - NOT some random, untrained actor or extra.

 

The moment the non authorized person (producer, director, grip, extra, actor) decides they have the authority to manipulate and "verify" equipment - the wrangler/ armorer should have IMMEDIATELY stopped the process; recleared the firearm - made "hot" or "cold" declaration and returned the firearm with the strict instruction to "leave it be".

 

The failure to abide by industry standard protocols is why the young lady is dead.

Whose responsibility is that remains to be seen - but assigning fault is not as simple as, "Alex pulled the trigger"

[Eyesa Horg]

Good explanation Creeker.

[John Kloehr]

4 hours ago, Tex Jones, SASS 2263 said:

\“The only conceivable alternative to the foregoing would be a situation in which the trigger was already pulled or held rearward while retracting the hammer to its full cock position. Although unlikely and totally contrary to the normal operation of these single action revolvers, such improper handling, would result in the discharge of a live cartridge,” it added.

I was shown how to do this at my first Cowboy shoot...

Quote

Investigators have not determined how and why live rounds were on the set of the movie.

This might help the armorer.

[Gungadin]

Doesn't our FBI continue to seem corrupt or a best incompetent?

 

Seems we know you can hold the trigger down and work the hammer?

 

Didn't the prop lady get prosecuted for this?  Someone put a live round in a 'prop gun' for the antigun west coast Hollywood bunch?

 

Hey Alec, those simple NRA Rules work.  The safety between you ears doesn't.

[watab kid]

between this and all the rest going on - including hunter B walking away from gun charges , how exactly can these libs look at prosecuting anyone with their stupid gun laws ? i guess if i was a criminal or a liberal voter i could expect to walk away with a slap on the wrist ? 

[Presidio]

Creeker, I agree with your assessment of industry standards and protocols.  Followed or otherwise.  Thank you from the bottom of my heart 

 

What I'm concerned with more over is the fact that someone brought live ammo onto the set.  Accidentally or for whatever intentional purpose and use, has yet to be ascertained.

 

Yet, I'm a still firm believer of when any person is issued or handed a firearm by anyone, that person has the ultimate right and responsibility to check the weapon for safety before use.

 

That live round just didn't hop into the revolver by itself.  Nor did it "ninja" it's way through checkpoints.  At the very least, three people were responsible.  The armorer, the handler, and the shooter.

 

Whatever check system was in place, tragically failed.

 

Nuff said on my part.

[Henry T Harrison]

15 hours ago, Creeker, SASS #43022 said:

Can we get over this point?

It was a movie set - land of MAKE BELIEVE.

Firearms are pointed in unsafe directions all the time on movie sets.

 

It would be challenging to create a visually exciting narrative AND abide by REAL WORLD safety rules.

 

Thats why they have procedures, armorers and gun wranglers to ensure that conditions are kept "safe" for these types of gun handling.

 

The person who brought and introduced live ammo into the equation - the person(s) who ignored or bypassed industry safety norms is/ are the person(s) at fault - regardless of your personal feelings about Reed, Baldwin or liberal hollywood elites.

 

We ALL know that the firearm operated as designed - the hammer was cocked, the trigger pulled and the firearm discharged.

 

That is not the sin - without the live ammo being present; this tragedy would not have occurred. 

And again; anyone who has spent any time on a set or within ANY industry where an assigned safety official oversees an operation knows full well that AFTER the safety official designates a situation or piece of equipment "hot" or "cold" - the handler is NEVER empowered to adjust, handle or mess with the item.

 

This protocol exists to create a chain of custody and control and have a "trusted, accredited" person of responsibility performing the oversight - NOT some random, untrained actor or extra.

 

The moment the non authorized person (producer, director, grip, extra, actor) decides they have the authority to manipulate and "verify" equipment - the wrangler/ armorer should have IMMEDIATELY stopped the process; recleared the firearm - made "hot" or "cold" declaration and returned the firearm with the strict instruction to "leave it be".

 

The failure to abide by industry standard protocols is why the young lady is dead.

Whose responsibility is that remains to be seen - but assigning fault is not as simple as, "Alex pulled the trigger"

It might be the land of make believe but the gun was very real and the consequences of violating the normal safety rules was fatal 

[bgavin]

The problem I have, is Baldwin lied, and continues to lie, about not pulling the trigger.

[Crooked River Pete, SASS 43485]

What I can't understand is this was a movie set, no camera was running? I know they were trying to get the best angle but why not record it on a cell phone at least?

[Creeker, SASS #43022]

2 hours ago, Presidio said:

Creeker, I agree with your assessment of industry standards and protocols.  Followed or otherwise.  Thank you from the bottom of my heart 

 

What I'm concerned with more over is the fact that someone brought live ammo onto the set.  Accidentally or for whatever intentional purpose and use, has yet to be ascertained.

 

Yet, I'm a still firm believer of when any person is issued or handed a firearm by anyone, that person has the ultimate right and responsibility to check the weapon for safety before use.

 

That live round just didn't hop into the revolver by itself.  Nor did it "ninja" it's way through checkpoints.  At the very least, three people were responsible.  The armorer, the handler, and the shooter.

 

Whatever check system was in place, tragically failed.

 

Nuff said on my part.

I do not disagree on any point.

MULTIPLE violations of BOTH industry protocol and proper gun handling operation occurred - and a tragedy resulted.

 

SOMEBODY brought live ammo into the set.

SOMEBODY placed live ammo into the firearm.

SOMEBODY failed to check/ verify the firearm as safe prior to on set handling.

Alex Baldwin aimed this firearm and discharged it - Why?  Whether through accident, ignorance, negligence or even deliberate action is unknown.

 

The SOMEBODIES above holds blame.

I don't know (and neither does anyone on this forum) how many of those somebodies are named Alex.

 

The thirst for Baldwins pound of flesh is fueled by contempt of the man, his political views and hypocrisy.  And I get it - I am not a Baldwin fan nor apologizer; but blame and fault are supposed to be assigned by articles of fact and occurence not personality.

 

This is a "firearms" forum - most of us are "gun guys"; we expect certain behaviors from gun handling.  And are rightfully outraged when preventable events occur.

 

But IF this tragedy had happened in another fashion - would the blame and vitriol be spewed in the same fashion and at the same target?

 

Lets say that, instead of Rust and Alec Baldwin - that a death occurred on the set of John Wick involving Keanu Reeves.

 

And let's say that instead of a firearm; during a rehearsal - a car being stunt driven by Keanu ran over a camera person.

 

Keanu says he was given the keys and told, "Good to go". 

Drive quickly toward the camera for perspective framing.

Keanu says the brakes failed.

No one knows who last checked the cars maintenance.

The investigative group was unable to replicate the failing.

 

The facts would not be in dispute - Keanu ran over a camera person.  That person died.

 

Would there be the same claims that it was all on Keanu because before Keanu drove the car without personally checking its condition? 

He accepted the word of another person?

That he broke the cardinal vehicle rule of pointing the car "directly" at another person - should have been driving at an angle just in case the brakes failed?

 

I doubt it because; well, we like Keanu.

And we all accept the fact that we take the word of others regarding our safety ALL THE TIME.

 

No one in this forum has ever requested to see the elevator safety paperwork before we go up three floors in a hotel.  We accept and expect that SOMEBODY checked it.

No one in this forum has ever took their lug wrench and checked all the wheels on the rental car before we set off.  We accept and expect that SOMEBODY checked it.

No one in this forum has ever performed the airplane walk around checklist on their Southwest flight out of Love Field (as a ticketed passenger).  We accept and expect SOMEBODY checked it.

 

Is it that much of a stretch that an untrained and ignorant person would be handed a "tool", a "prop" and after being told it's safe - they would simply accept and expect SOMEBODY checked it?

[Cypress Sun]

 

Big difference...the gun functioned as it was designed. 

[Creeker, SASS #43022]

41 minutes ago, Cypress Sun said:

 

Big difference...the gun functioned as it was designed. 

So you say - were you somehow present on set or involved in the testing?

 

This forum has been very quick to make assumptions and place blame - and I dare say; a lot of it is because of the PERSON involved as much as the event.

[Cypress Sun]

Just now, Creeker, SASS #43022 said:

So you say - were you somehow present on set or involved in the testing?

 

This forum has been very quick to make assumptions and place blame - and I dare say; a lot of it is because of the PERSON involved as much as the event.

 

Whatever...

[Creeker, SASS #43022]

Just now, Cypress Sun said:

 

Whatever...

Yup; when you run out of salient points.

 

[Cypress Sun]

1 minute ago, Creeker, SASS #43022 said:

Yup; when you run out of salient points.

 

 

Salient points? Keanu Reeves and brake failures...makes sense now!

 

Go fight with someone else...I'm not in the mood.

 

 

[bgavin]

I will stick with my original observation:  Baldwin lied, and continues to lie about pulling the trigger.  This is a smoke screen lie.

[Trailrider #896]

On 8/16/2023 at 11:54 AM, Tex Jones, SASS 2263 said:

The weapon – broken during tests run by the FBI and inoperable when Forensic Science Services got it – then was returned to operable condition.

Wait a minute! How were the original parts broken during FBI testing?  Replacing the broken parts with new ones, proves NOTHING!  Of course the gun with new parts functioned as  it was designed to do. The question is what were the tests run by the FBI, and what was the condition of those parts before the G-men messed with them? I have posted before the possible failure modes that might have occurred.  I don't give a rat's patooty about A.B. one way or another. Were the original parts properly heat treated? If too hard or soft that could have affected the function of the gun when the accident/incident occurred. I am NOT an attorney, but it seems to me that the train of evidence has been destroyed. 

[Presidio]

It has been, and more than likely rendered inadmissible now.

 

Also, what do you want to bet the paper trail and documentation of this so called testing, has been misplaced.