Yes, I’m a little late to the game. I wanted to be sure I had all the relevant reports from officialdom. I think it’s generally better to be accurate, than rapidly off target.
Alec Baldwin and his attorney are spinning like tops, trying to counter the — expected — damning report on the forensic examination of the firearm Baldwin used to kill Halyna Hutchins.
Baldwin has previously suggested that Rust Assistant Director Dave Halls and Armorer Hannah Gutierrez-Reed are to blame for the shooting. He claims that they declared the gun “cold” when it was actually “hot,” and he has accused them of not doing enough checks.
Baldwin also had possession of the gun. What of his responsibility to do a check, or to handle the firearm in a responsible manner?
“The FBI report is being misconstrued,” Baldwin’s attorney said. “The gun fired in testing only one time — without having to pull the trigger — when the hammer was pulled back and the gun broke in two different places.”
“The FBI was unable to fire the gun in any prior test, even when pulling the trigger, because it was in such poor condition,” the lawyer added.
Except that is definitely not what the FBI report says.
Item 2 is a .45 Colt (.45 Long Colt) caliber F.lli Pietta single-action revolver, Model 1873 SA (Californian), Serial Number E52277, which functioned normally when tested in the Laboratory.
“Unable to fire […] because it was in such poor condition” is not “functioned normally.”
Additionally, Item 2 has a hammer with a fixed firing pin and does not contain any internal safety mechanisms to prevent the firing pin from striking the primer of a chambered cartridge, such as a transfer bar or hammer block. This is consistent with normal operation for a single-action revolver of this design.
Again, normal operation; not failed to fire due to poor condition. I suspect that the shyster is basing his false claim that the gun failed to fire on this single, out of context sentence, from the FBI report.
This was the only successful discharge during this testing and it was attributed to the fracture of internal components, not the failure of the firearm or safety mechanisms.
Fuller context: “this testing” refers to the “Accidental Discharge Testing” section of the report. “This testing” failed to obtain a discharge without pulling the trigger when the weapon has at both quarter cock and half cock. Because the sear stops functioned normally.
At full cock, the FBI was able to cause the weapon to discharge without a trigger pull… only by pounding on the hammer so hard that the sear broke.
With the hammer in the full cock position, Item 2 could not be made to fire without a pull of the trigger while the working internal components were intact and functional. During this testing, portions of the trigger sear and cylinder stop fractured while the hammer was struck. The fracture of these internal components allowed the hammer to fall and the firing pin and detonated the primer. This was the only successful discharge during this testing and it was attributed to the fracture of internal components, not the failure of the firearm or safety mechanisms.
The sear functioned normally (yeah, that phrase again) until the FBI managed to break a previously normally functioning firearm in forcing a failure.
This report doesn’t exonerate Baldwin by demonstrating a firearm in poor condition. It condemns the lying bastard by proving the gun was working properly while in Baldwin’s criminally negligent hands.
Baldwin, and too many excuse-making media outlets make a big deal of the Medical Examiner’s report seemingly clearing Baldwin of culpability by declaring the incident an accident. Sure enough, that word appears on the report summary page (page 35).
MANNER OF DEATH: Accident
Alone and out of context. Let’s read the rest of the report for the details of that one word. Page 37:
Death was caused by a gunshot wound of the chest. Review of available law enforcement reports showed no compelling demonstration that the firearm was intentionally loaded with live ammunition on set. Based on all available information, including the absence of obvious intent to cause harm or death, the manner of death is best classified as accident.
I’ll grant that Baldwin probably had no intent to cause Hutchin’s death, or to wound Souza. That leaves a lot of room for negligence, which makes it involuntary manslaughter on Baldwin’s part.
Involuntary manslaughter consists of manslaughter committed in the commission of an unlawful act not amounting to felony, or in the commission of a lawful act which might produce death in an unlawful manner or without due caution and circumspection.
Ignoring, thus violating, every basic rule of firearms handing is most definitely “without due caution and circumspection.”.
Baldwin negligently failed to check the gun he was handling. Because why would an allegedly responsible adult do what little kds successfully learn, when he has babysitters to do it for him?
He negligently pointed the loaded firearm at two human beings. Because he’s only an allegedly responsible adult, and someone supposedly told him to do it.
He negligently fired a normally functioning gun at those two human beings. Because who knew that if you hold the trigger down while pulling the hammer back, the normally functioning loaded gun would function normally. Because what allegedly responsible adult could expect such a normal occurrence?
Others may share some additional culpability in this senseless killing, particularly the so-called “armorer.” Why was live ammo on a movie set at all? Why did the armorer not properly examine her supposedly dummy and blank rounds to be sure of what she had? Why was any round — dummy, blank, or live — loaded into a gun for a rehearsal that didn’t call for a discharge? Why was anyone but the “armorer” handing Baldwin a firearm?
But if Baldwin had followed a few basic rules, the possible failures of others still would not have mattered. Is he a responsible adult? I’m dubious, because his “I didn’t know the gun was loaded” sounds remarkably like the act of a three year-old.
In the final analysis, despite any additional culpability on the part of others, Alec Baldwin is responsible for the negligent killing of Halyna Hutchins. He failed to check the weapon. He pointed it at two people. He discharged a normally functioning firearm at them.
Alec Baldwin killed Halyna Hutchins.
All that remains to be seen is if New Mexico authorities will even do the right thing, or protect Baldwin, and future film production income for the state. I’m also dubious of the right thing happening, since Baldwin wasn’t arrested and formally charged months ago.
Carl is an unpaid TZP volunteer. If you found this post useful, please consider dropping something in his tip jar. He could really use the money, what with ISP bills, site hosting and SSL certificate, new 2021 model hip, and general life expenses.
Click here to donate via PayPal.
(More Tip Jar Options) |
