Alec Baldwin

  • You are viewing Orangepower as a Guest. To start new threads, reply to posts, or participate in polls or contests - you must register. Registration is free and easy. Click Here to register.

CowboyJD

The Voice of Reason...occasionally......rarely
A/V Subscriber
Dec 10, 2004
19,216
20,834
1,743
Once again you neglect to point out he was producer. Ultimately he was responsible for the staffing on set especially if there were any issues with that staffing and people walking off the job because of prior safety concerns.

Sent from my Moto Z (2) using Tapatalk
Once again you neglect to consider that there is a difference between civil liability and criminal culpability.

You're not arguing that he would be criminally liable for everything that happens on a set just because he is a producer, are you?

Because if you are, that is just dead wrong legally.
 

Jostate

Identifies as a Cowboys fan
A/V Subscriber
Jun 24, 2005
22,461
15,332
1,743
Once again you neglect to consider that there is a difference between civil liability and criminal culpability.

You're not arguing that he would be criminally liable for everything that happens on a set just because he is a producer, are you?

Because if you are, that is just dead wrong legally.
Is it too cynical of me to say civil liability is determined by deepest pockets?
 
Mar 11, 2006
4,226
2,360
1,743
Once again you neglect to consider that there is a difference between civil liability and criminal culpability.

You're not arguing that he would be criminally liable for everything that happens on a set just because he is a producer, are you?

Because if you are, that is just dead wrong legally.
Legal minds disagree.

Alec Baldwin risks being prosecuted for involuntary manslaughter over the accidental shooting of cinematographer Halyna Hutchins, legal experts have warned.

The Hollywood star could face the charges because of his role as the executive producer of the film, rather than for pulling the trigger, suggested US attorney Joseph Costa.
”As executive producer, you are in a position of control and can be prosecuted criminally


https://www.yahoo.com/news/alec-baldwin-risks-being-prosecuted-154449637.html
 
Last edited:

CowboyJD

The Voice of Reason...occasionally......rarely
A/V Subscriber
Dec 10, 2004
19,216
20,834
1,743
Legal minds disagree.

Alec Baldwin risks being prosecuted for involuntary manslaughter over the accidental shooting of cinematographer Halyna Hutchins, legal experts have warned.

The Hollywood star could face the charges because of his role as the executive producer of the film, rather than for pulling the trigger, suggested US attorney Joseph Costa.
”As executive producer, you are in a position of control and can be prosecuted criminally


https://www.yahoo.com/news/alec-baldwin-risks-being-prosecuted-154449637.html
No they don't:

(From the exact same article and first quote from the exact same quote which you interestingly truncated:

“It’s the equivalent of drinking and driving, meaning someone may not have intended to cause great harm but they do.”

(From the other quoted legal expert in the article)

"Rebecca Roiphe, of the New York Law School, said Baldwin could be charged with involuntary manslaughter if he failed to exercise the appropriate degree of care.

But even if a prosecutor determines that he was in some way at fault, these sorts of accidents are not regularly charged criminally," she said.

"A prosecutor would likely look at a number of factors to determine whether it would be appropriate to do so here."

Prosecutors would look at how personally culpable Baldwin was, or whether mistakes were made by a number of people, she said.

“If he was seriously cutting corners, prosecutors may look at it differently,” she added."

What I said was:

You're not arguing that he would be criminally liable for everything that happens on a set just because he is a producer, are you?

Your quoted expert compares it to drinking and driving....where the person takes the action of drinking and then driving...personal culpability....not blanket criminal culpability for anything that happens on set just because they are a producer.

The other quoted expert in that article points out that prosecutors would look at how PERSONALLY culpable Baldwin was.

Neither in any way contradicts my statement that he isn't criminally liable for anything that happens on a set he JUST because he was a producer.

This is what happens when Cable guys try to practice Google law.
 
Last edited:
Mar 11, 2006
4,226
2,360
1,743
No they don't:

(From the exact same article and first quote from the exact same quote which you interestingly truncated:

“It’s the equivalent of drinking and driving, meaning someone may not have intended to cause great harm but they do.”

(From the other quoted legal expert in the article)

"Rebecca Roiphe, of the New York Law School, said Baldwin could be charged with involuntary manslaughter if he failed to exercise the appropriate degree of care.

But even if a prosecutor determines that he was in some way at fault, these sorts of accidents are not regularly charged criminally," she said.

"A prosecutor would likely look at a number of factors to determine whether it would be appropriate to do so here."

Prosecutors would look at how personally culpable Baldwin was, or whether mistakes were made by a number of people, she said.

“If he was seriously cutting corners, prosecutors may look at it differently,” she added."

What I said was:

You're not arguing that he would be criminally liable for everything that happens on a set just because he is a producer, are you?

Your quoted expert compares it to drinking and driving....where the person takes the action of drinking and then driving...personal culpability....not blanket criminal culpability for anything that happens on set just because they are a producer.

The other quoted expert in that article points out that prosecutors would look at how PERSONALLY culpable Baldwin was.

Neither in any way contradicts my statement that he isn't criminally liable for anything that happens on a set he JUST because he was a producer.

This is what happens when Cable guys try to practice Google law.
@wrenhal never made a claim that he was referring to criminal or civil. You jumped in there with your assumption. He stated the Baldwin was the producer and that staff had previously walked off the set due to safety issues. You then claimed he was "dead wrong legally", even though he stated nothing about criminal vs civil.

The article clearly quotes an attorney with a history of entertainment law states that Baldwin could be found criminally responsible. So even if @wrenthal meant criminally responsible (which I don't believe that was his intention) it appears he absolutely was not "dead wrong". ---- Hence my only statement above that "legal minds disagree".

From what I have read about the incident, I don't think Baldwin should face criminal charges, but an expert tells us that he may be exposed.
 
Last edited:

wrenhal

Federal Marshal
Aug 11, 2011
12,273
4,552
1,743
Once again you neglect to point out he was producer. Ultimately he was responsible for the staffing on set especially if there were any issues with that staffing and people walking off the job because of prior safety concerns.

Sent from my Moto Z (2) using Tapatalk
Once again you neglect to consider that there is a difference between civil liability and criminal culpability.

You're not arguing that he would be criminally liable for everything that happens on a set just because he is a producer, are you?

Because if you are, that is just dead wrong legally.
I never made a distinction of criminal vs civil.

Sent from my Moto Z (2) using Tapatalk
 

snuffy

Calf fries are the original sack lunch.
Staff
A/V Subscriber
Feb 28, 2007
38,924
31,558
1,743
Oklahoma
After reading how it is supposed to be done I can’t imagine this happened

https://twitter.com/usatoday/status/1453104900456386561?s=21
 

llcoolw

Territorial Marshal
Feb 7, 2005
8,380
3,787
1,743
Sammamish, Washington.Dallas, Texas.Maui, Hawaii
No they don't:

(From the exact same article and first quote from the exact same quote which you interestingly truncated:

“It’s the equivalent of drinking and driving, meaning someone may not have intended to cause great harm but they do.”

(From the other quoted legal expert in the article)

"Rebecca Roiphe, of the New York Law School, said Baldwin could be charged with involuntary manslaughter if he failed to exercise the appropriate degree of care.

But even if a prosecutor determines that he was in some way at fault, these sorts of accidents are not regularly charged criminally," she said.

"A prosecutor would likely look at a number of factors to determine whether it would be appropriate to do so here."

Prosecutors would look at how personally culpable Baldwin was, or whether mistakes were made by a number of people, she said.

“If he was seriously cutting corners, prosecutors may look at it differently,” she added."

What I said was:

You're not arguing that he would be criminally liable for everything that happens on a set just because he is a producer, are you?

Your quoted expert compares it to drinking and driving....where the person takes the action of drinking and then driving...personal culpability....not blanket criminal culpability for anything that happens on set just because they are a producer.

The other quoted expert in that article points out that prosecutors would look at how PERSONALLY culpable Baldwin was.

Neither in any way contradicts my statement that he isn't criminally liable for anything that happens on a set he JUST because he was a producer.

This is what happens when Cable guys try to practice Google law.
@wrenhal never made a claim that he was referring to criminal or civil. You jumped in there with your assumption. He stated the Baldwin was the producer and that staff had previously walked off the set due to safety issues. You then claimed he was "dead wrong legally", even though he stated nothing about criminal vs civil.

The article clearly quotes an attorney with a history of entertainment law states that Baldwin could be found criminally responsible. So even if @wrenthal meant criminally responsible (which I don't believe that was his intention) it appears he absolutely was not "dead wrong". ---- Hence my only statement above that "legal minds disagree".

From what I have read about the incident, I don't think Baldwin should face criminal charges, but an expert tells us that he may be exposed.
I never made a distinction of criminal vs civil.

Sent from my Moto Z (2) using Tapatalk
It was me on page 2 I think. I said it would be civil. Perhaps the discussion evolved from that.
 

CowboyJD

The Voice of Reason...occasionally......rarely
A/V Subscriber
Dec 10, 2004
19,216
20,834
1,743
It was me on page 2 I think. I said it would be civil. Perhaps the discussion evolved from that.
My post that you quoted was just a response to a Google lawyer that didn’t even read the whole article he cited or didn’t understand it if he did.

Nothing you did or said.

I could end up being both civil and criminal, but Baldwin...if he does have criminal culpability, it won’t be just because he is the producer and therefor criminally responsible for everything that occurs on set. It will be because of his actions or lack thereof of required conduct that results in his criminal liability...not just because he is the producer.
 
Last edited:

CowboyJD

The Voice of Reason...occasionally......rarely
A/V Subscriber
Dec 10, 2004
19,216
20,834
1,743
@wrenhal never made a claim that he was referring to criminal or civil. You jumped in there with your assumption. He stated the Baldwin was the producer and that staff had previously walked off the set due to safety issues. You then claimed he was "dead wrong legally", even though he stated nothing about criminal vs civil.

The article clearly quotes an attorney with a history of entertainment law states that Baldwin could be found criminally responsible. So even if @wrenthal meant criminally responsible (which I don't believe that was his intention) it appears he absolutely was not "dead wrong". ---- Hence my only statement above that "legal minds disagree".

From what I have read about the incident, I don't think Baldwin should face criminal charges, but an expert tells us that he may be exposed.
So it’s that the google lawyer doesn’t understand what was said by myself OR the article he cited.

Got it.

Words have meaning....

Good talk.
 
Dec 11, 2011
1,359
1,183
1,743
38
After the info I’ve read so far, I hope some charges find their way to this assistant director “cold gun” yelling fellow. THAT guy sounds like an incompetent jackass.
 

llcoolw

Territorial Marshal
Feb 7, 2005
8,380
3,787
1,743
Sammamish, Washington.Dallas, Texas.Maui, Hawaii
After the info I’ve read so far, I hope some charges find their way to this assistant director “cold gun” yelling fellow. THAT guy sounds like an incompetent jackass.
This is obviously the key to the entire story. Based on the TMZ level of information and the hope it’s factual, that “weapons cart” was unattended. There may be a system in place that when she’s not present, no one can touch. If so, he is the main blame. If the cart was unattended and there’s no system in place for safety, she’s the main blame. There may be more blame for her if there are rules about having live weapons on a set at all.

Weird last thing to see as your life is ending, Alec Baldwin.
 

snuffy

Calf fries are the original sack lunch.
Staff
A/V Subscriber
Feb 28, 2007
38,924
31,558
1,743
Oklahoma
Last edited:
Jul 5, 2020
1,436
317
213
58
Broken Arrow
Why are trying to make this political, thai has nothing to do with politics? And if you are reading news sources that says it is you might want to expand your reading list.
If you really don't believe one's political affiliation will/could not come into play here, particularly in this current political climate of the country, you might need a little help pulling your head out of the sand. Besides that, just looking into her track record.

District attorney defends decision not to seek jail time | Local News | santafenewmexican.com

Facebook flap fuels lawsuit against district attorney | Local News | santafenewmexican.com
 

Jostate

Identifies as a Cowboys fan
A/V Subscriber
Jun 24, 2005
22,461
15,332
1,743
Why are trying to make this political, this has nothing to do with politics? And if you are reading news sources that says it is you might want to expand your reading list.
I want to be with you on this. But "this isn't political" is starting to join "looks don't matter" and "money can't buy happiness".
 

snuffy

Calf fries are the original sack lunch.
Staff
A/V Subscriber
Feb 28, 2007
38,924
31,558
1,743
Oklahoma
If you really don't believe one's political affiliation will/could not come into play here, particularly in this current political climate of the country, you might need a little help pulling your head out of the sand. Besides that, just looking into her track record.

District attorney defends decision not to seek jail time | Local News | santafenewmexican.com

Facebook flap fuels lawsuit against district attorney | Local News | santafenewmexican.com
Your pushing to make this a political issue does not make it a political issue. This is a tragedy and dragging politics into this is weak at best.