This video is a tantalizing ad for George Stefanopoulos’ interview with Alec Baldwin over the tragedy on the “Rust” movie set shooting which caused the accidental death of cinematographer Halyna Hutchins. The show may be worth watching just to hear Alec Baldwin explain how if he didn’t pull the trigger, how did the bullet leave the gun and kill Hutchins?
It is certainly possible that the gun was jostled and it went off. If I recall correctly, Baldwin said at the time that he was taking the gun out of a holster.
But that still begs the question of why there was a live round in the gun to begin with? The armorer’s lawyers went on television recently to suggest that somebody had deliberately “sabotaged” the set. Variety:
[Jason] Bowles and Robert Gorence, the attorneys for “Rust” armorer Hannah Gutierrez-Reed, spoke on “Today” Wednesday morning to propose a clearer timeline about how a live round got on set. Bowles also brought up the new defense that someone may have “sabotaged” the set: “We’re assuming somebody put the live round in that box, which, if you think about that, the person who put the live round in the box of dummy rounds had to have the purpose of sabotaging the set.”
The “sabotaging the set” statement made anchor Savannah Guthrie pause and clarify, asking, “Is that your theory of the case? That someone intentionally placed a live round into a box of dummies, for the purpose of it ending up in a weapon that would be used on set?”
“We don’t have a theory yet, we are investigating and we’re trying to get all of the facts — that’s one of the possibilities,” Bowles responded.
When Guthrie pressed further, Bowles said, “I believe that somebody who would do that would want to sabotage the set, want to prove a point, want to say that they’re disgruntled, they’re unhappy. And we know that people had walked off the set the day before.”
When asked if a crew member could have tampered, Bowles said, “I think you can’t rule anybody out at this point. We know there was a live round in a box of dummy rounds that shouldn’t have been there. We have people who had left the set, who had walked out because they were disgruntled. We have a time frame between 11 a.m. and 1 p.m., approximately, that day, in which the firearms at times were unattended, so there was opportunity to tamper with this scene.”
Gorence added that “that was completely unattended at all times, giving someone access and opportunity.” Gutierrez-Reed wasn’t able to keep an eye on the firearms during that time period, Gorence said, because “she had another duty and responsibility as key props assistant, and so she had gone to do that, right after she had provided the handgun to [assistant director Dave] Halls. So Mr. Halls took custody of the weapon and at that point she was doing her other duties as key prop assistant.”
Stefanopoulos mentions George Clooney in this clip. Clooney made no bones about how screwed up this situation was in a recent interview. The Independent:
“Why for the life of me this low-budget film, with producers who haven’t produced anything, wouldn’t have hired, for the armourer, someone with experience.” […]
“Every single time I’m handed a gun on set, I look at it, I open it, I show it to the person I’m pointing it to, we show it to the crew, every single take you hand it back to the armour when you’re done, and you do it again. Everyone does it.”
Clooney also talked about the safety process when he has used a gun in a film: “We need to be better at making the heads of department experienced and know what they’re doing. Because this is just infuriating. Every time I get handed a six gun, you point it at the ground and you fire. You squeeze it six times. Always.”
He then called the situation “insane” and “infuriating”.
The actor and director also addressed claims the assistant director called out “cold gun” on set signifying that the gun was safe to use: ”I’ve never heard of the term ‘cold gun’, they’re just talking about stuff I’ve never heard of. It’s infuriating.”
It is infuriating and insane. No argument. It’s also emotionally devastating. Alec Baldwin looks like he’s aged 15 years. He’s been sued by one crew member and other lawsuits may be coming. Criminal charges have not been filed but they have not been ruled out, either.
The armorer’s lawyers went on to issue a statement about how incredibly diligent and safety conscious their client was. Perhaps that’s true. Then what happened? This has all the earmarks of an unsolved mystery. It will go down in the movie archives along with the discovery of the Black Dahlia and other Hollywood incidents for which there is no answer.
Watching that short segment with Alec and George, you can see it on Alec’s face that he as been tormented by all of this, not really knowing what happened. He looks terrible, bags under his eyes and he looks like he’s aged many years. I always liked Alec Baldwin, I can’t imagine him doing something so cynical as shooting another human being, especially someone who he worked with and had a good relationship with. I hope this all gets worked out and Alec is not held responsible for this terrible tragedy! Prayers for you Alec!
That armorer wasn’t even remotely qualified for the job, didn’t do any of the things that should have been done, and knows she’s looking at time behind bars.
If I may place a bet in this drama, I bet that Alec Baldwin was possibly intensionally drawn into this murderous case as active shooter.
There is a group of revenge thursty influencial individuals who want to destroy Baldwin for his parody playing Trump. To discredit and take revenge on the film set and organizer looks less “attractive” as ultimate cause.