I can empathize that this sucks to go through because I haven’t read anything to suggest she had murderous intent, but even accidents have consequences. There have to be penalties for setting up dangerous conditions to make sure that happens as rarely as possible. It’s why charges like “involuntary manslaughter” exist.
While this was technically an accident, I put it in the same league as driving drunk and killing someone. It was preventable by doing the bare minimum of what her job responsibilities were.
I agree and that’s why I finished by saying even these situations, where there’s no intent, have to be prosecuted and punished. While I empathize with making mistakes (having made my own albeit none nearly so serious) I still think there’s a good reason she’s headed to prison.
It’s “an accident” in the same way getting shit faced and going for a cross country drive and wrecking is “an accident”.
She violated pretty much every safety regulation, and I believe was even getting drunk and shooting the prop guns on set with live bullets. She was definitely shooting them on set, I just don’t know if they proved she was doing it while drunk.
A drunk driver doesn’t mean to kill anyone either. But most don’t say it was just an accident and try to emphasize with the irresponsible sociopath who got someone killed because they thought they knew more than the law.
I’m not sure how much experience you have with alcoholics, but when they say they’re “hungover” they’re usually still legally drunk too. Often they had a drink first thing after waking up to take off the edge.
She (correctly) beat an evidence tampering charge on reasonable doubt, because the person Reed handed a white baggie of powder to, threw it away - after the shooting happened.
If she’s actively using narcotics (why else have it on her?) and working as a set armorer, that is a massive dereliction of duty irrespective of drug laws. She needs treatment absolutely, but as set armorer it is your responsibility ultimately, and there was live ammo that fired on set that day. That is her responsibility, Baldwin’s culpability for firing/“pointing” the gun remains to be determined.
Back in 2010 an Officer in my state killed 1 motorcyclist and injured two others while drunk driving on the job. He was eventually sentenced to 4 years in prison for that.
By comparison 18 months seems reasonable for her crime.
She wasn’t qualified to do a very specific job she was hired specifically to do. The people who hired her are also at fault, but her very actions and incompetence at her duties lead to a shooting and death. You don’t just shrug and say oops, accidents happen if a certified electrician or utility worker messes up so badly they burn your house down.
I can empathize that this sucks to go through because I haven’t read anything to suggest she had murderous intent, but even accidents have consequences. There have to be penalties for setting up dangerous conditions to make sure that happens as rarely as possible. It’s why charges like “involuntary manslaughter” exist.
While this was technically an accident, I put it in the same league as driving drunk and killing someone. It was preventable by doing the bare minimum of what her job responsibilities were.
I agree and that’s why I finished by saying even these situations, where there’s no intent, have to be prosecuted and punished. While I empathize with making mistakes (having made my own albeit none nearly so serious) I still think there’s a good reason she’s headed to prison.
…
It’s “an accident” in the same way getting shit faced and going for a cross country drive and wrecking is “an accident”.
She violated pretty much every safety regulation, and I believe was even getting drunk and shooting the prop guns on set with live bullets. She was definitely shooting them on set, I just don’t know if they proved she was doing it while drunk.
A drunk driver doesn’t mean to kill anyone either. But most don’t say it was just an accident and try to emphasize with the irresponsible sociopath who got someone killed because they thought they knew more than the law.
deleted by creator
She was staying after work and shooting live ammo out of the guns used on set…
There is evidence someone was also drinking because she had empty containers in her vehicle along with the live ammo.
They didn’t need to prove she was drinking to find her guilty, but she said she was still “hungover” when she did it.
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/weapons-expert-was-likely-hungover-set-fatal-rust-shooting-prosecutors-rcna89230
I’m not sure how much experience you have with alcoholics, but when they say they’re “hungover” they’re usually still legally drunk too. Often they had a drink first thing after waking up to take off the edge.
deleted by creator
She (correctly) beat an evidence tampering charge on reasonable doubt, because the person Reed handed a white baggie of powder to, threw it away - after the shooting happened.
If she’s actively using narcotics (why else have it on her?) and working as a set armorer, that is a massive dereliction of duty irrespective of drug laws. She needs treatment absolutely, but as set armorer it is your responsibility ultimately, and there was live ammo that fired on set that day. That is her responsibility, Baldwin’s culpability for firing/“pointing” the gun remains to be determined.
deleted by creator
Well, I tried…
Back in 2010 an Officer in my state killed 1 motorcyclist and injured two others while drunk driving on the job. He was eventually sentenced to 4 years in prison for that.
By comparison 18 months seems reasonable for her crime.
She wasn’t qualified to do a very specific job she was hired specifically to do. The people who hired her are also at fault, but her very actions and incompetence at her duties lead to a shooting and death. You don’t just shrug and say oops, accidents happen if a certified electrician or utility worker messes up so badly they burn your house down.