Remember when the recording of Tom Cruise freaking out on set went public? And it was all because of crew members being unmasked, I think? Sure, he was criticized for that, and mocked, but that’s how someone tends to overreact when they know they’re completely responsible for what happens to his cast and crew during a film.
Alec Baldwin denying responsibility is so disappointing, whether or not he fired that shot. Even if he’s innocent, he’s still responsible for what happened.
Now that I’ve watched the interview, I see that the headlines that he’s trying to deny responsibility are just that - headlines. And it’s not what he’s saying. He’s only explaining that he was following the directions given to him. He doesn’t say “I’m innocent”. He says he doesn’t know what went wrong, and that the police investigation will take some time. He didn’t want to wait that long to say something publicly about what happened.
I think it’s too early to try to clear things up because it does come across as trying to clear his name. He needs to go away until the investigation is over, and then remain away after that. If the police find him guilty, then he can do these interviews where he tries to convince us he did nothing wrong.
I’m sure that Alec is doing exactly what his lawyers have instructed him to do. Of course he was going to have to say something! He was the famous person holding the gun, so he’s the one everyone wanted to hear from.
When my mother had an accident at work and her hand was torn open, the owners of the factory visited her in the hospital. She was so happy that they were so kind and caring! And then she received an official letter telling her that the factory was not at fault in the accident, and she was so upset! We reassured her that the owners probably weren’t even aware that their lawyers had sent that letter.
There is just no good way to handle these situations.
There was a great way to handle this: show respect to her family and not publicly describe her death! All he has to say is that he can't comment on anything until the police investigation is concluded. Everyone would have respected that. Instead, he put his ego in front of their grief, and that isn't an honourable thing to do.
Of course in hindsight there were much better ways to handle it! But I’m talking about handling it right then, right after it happened. He didn’t say anything disrespectful. And I don’t think there was any police investigation yet. Yes, he was trying to make sure everyone knew he wasn’t to blame. He should try to make up for it by being keeping quiet now!
He’s trying to control the narrative because of the new lawsuit. It’s cold and heartless, I agree, but that’s PR. This could ruin him, financially, so he’s trying to get out ahead of it and garner some sympathy. That’s the way it’s done. It’s sick, of course, but we live in a profoundly sick society where money is more important (or has a limit on outpay) when compared to human life.
The only reason I can see to charge Baldwin is because he was a producer and therefore responsible for safety on the set. They’re not going to be able to make this stick against him, I don’t think. I can see charges against the armorer and even perhaps the 1st AD, but I think he struck a plea deal.
Yes, now it goes to a jury trial. The indictment means a prosecutor believes they have enough evidence to charge and win their case.
I think the most he could get is 6 months in prison and a $5,000 fine. The charge is because it was an accident, not premeditated, hence involuntary, and manslaughter because someone died. Same sort of charge for a car accident in which someone dies. There’s a certain recklessness implied in the charge.
I know Baldwin says he didn’t pull the trigger but that’s ridiculous. It wouldn’t have fired if he hadn’t. The gun was handled by 2 other people before it was given to him so that means he can say he thought it had been safety checked twice before they handed him what amounts to basically a toy, a prop gun. The armorer and the 1st AD (who handed him the weapon and told him it was “cold”), are the ones to blame. Although I suppose he also, as producer, bears some of the responsibility for there being live ammo on set and an unsafe gun environment, given that there were people who quit because of the lack of safety on the set before this accident.
Doesn’t he have to plead guilty or not guilty first? I’m sure the US court system is not quite like in Canada, but I remember going for jury duty a few years ago (I wasn’t selected) and the procedure was explained to us. They said that the jury had to be all ready to go in case the defendant pleaded “not guilty” - which had to be done in the court room in front of everyone. Our defendant did plead not guilty, so they proceeded. But if she had pleaded guilty, it would have ended there - she would be sentenced and we would all go home.
It wasn’t until I read about the one-week trial in the newspaper each day that I learned that everyone else who had been charged in that same crime had already pleaded guilty. This defendant was the only one to insist she wasn’t guilty.
It turns out it had been an impaired driving/road-rage incident. The defendant, a nurse, had left her shift at a hospital one night and met some friends at a bar. After an evening of drinking, she was driving home and said that another carload of drunk women tried to run her off the road. This led to a car crash, and a passenger in the other car was killed. The defendant said that she scared and had to speed because they were chasing her, but in fact the other car was never behind her. They were in front of her, and she was chasing them. She was found guilty. If I remember correctly, the sentence is more lenient if you plead guilty and avoid a trial.
In Alec Baldwin’s case, I would think that admitting that he must accept some blame (because he was the person in charge) might only lead to a massive fine, which he could certainly afford.