The woman who oversaw the use of weapons on the movie set where Alec Baldwin fatally shot a cinematographer has pleaded not guilty to involuntary manslaughter and tampering with evidence, New Mexico court officials said.
Movie armorer Hannah Gutierrez-Reed waived her right to an arraignment on the charges in the 2021 shooting of cinematographer Halyna Hutchins on the set of the Western movie “Rust," officials said Wednesday.
A state district judge tentatively scheduled a trial for December.
A defense attorney for Gutierrez-Reed has characterized it a tragic accident and says the weapons specialist committed no crime. Prosecutors allege Gutierrez-Reed was negligent in the handling of firearms and ammunition on the set.
“Rust” safety coordinator and assistant director David Halls has pleaded no contest to a charge of unsafe handling of a firearm and received a suspended sentence of six months’ probation.
In April, prosecutors dropped charges against Baldwin, who was pointing a gun at Hutchins when it went off, killing her and injuring director Joel Souza.
© Copyright 2023 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed without permission.
17 Comments
Login to comment
Thunderbird2
What amazes me is that there were live rounds anywhere near the set - I mean why were they there? It's a film set, not a shooting range.
WA4TKG
Alec Baldwin is the ONLY person responsible for this, he POINTED a Weapon at someone who WASN'T even IN the movie, so far, for UNTOLD reason(s), and pulled the trigger...what does that say to YOU ?!
3RENSHO
Purple hair speaks volumes: 'Guilty as charged, Your Honour!'
fatrainfallingintheforest
It was during a rehearsal, so Baldwin's scene partner(s) may not even have been on set. Also, I'm sure you've seen POV shots in movies in which an actor is pointing their gun straight at a camera. Usually that kind of shot will pull focus from the actor's face to the barrel of the gun. And there's always coverage (the scene being filmed on different cameras, e.g. shot reverse shot) or set-ups, when the lighting/sound/camera crew are getting their equipment sorted. In short, there are many possible reasons for a member of the crew to have been shot instead of an actor.
I think it's a pretty clear failure on the part of the armorer, and Baldwin also bears some responsibility for not checking personally that the gun was clear, or cold.
Abe234
The armorer is responsible for all weapons.She is supposed to be the weapons expert, and is there to make ALL weapons are safe. It is clear that not ALL actors are trained in weapons and that’s why there is an armored. She should never have had any live rounds anywhere near the set. Except on a shooting range. The armorer is responsible for picking up the weapons and cocking it, and checking the chamber, and to confirm it is clear. And getting the other person to witness is and say clear.(or whatever words they use) In my experience she was the last person to check it’s safety and hand it over in a safe condition. Clearly it wasn’t. No weapon should ever be left unattended so that a live rounds can be put in between scenes. Basically if you find a weapon, assume it’s loaded. Picked up the weapon, check it, in front of the other person who is to receive it. Still no reason for live rounds on a set. She’s the armorer and I guess the buck stops with her for bringing rounds onto the set. ( if someone else brought rounds onto the set, she should still have give through the safety procedure.
Blacklabel
Oh course she is not guilty.
Alec Baldwin did it.
Yrral
Have JT overslept
Bob Fosse
That’s a very poor interpretation of how the law works. Almost as poor as saying she is guilty because of her hair colour
stormcrow
It’s strange that crew members were firing live ammunition with the prop guns in their free time near the set. It seems like a dangerous & unnecessary risk.
Peter Neil
She had ultimate responsibility for the safety and security of the weapons on the set. Allowing people to use it for firing live ammo is beyond irresponsible. She said the gun was safe, handed it to the AD, who said it was safe, who handed it to Baldwin.
He was told by the cinematographer to fire it directly at her. It was not an accident, it was criminal negligence by the armorer.
therougou
Because some idiots wanted to try out the "toys" used in the film.
therougou
It tells me YOU think too simplistically, or YOU have some vandetta against the rich and famous.
opheliajadefeldt
stormcrowToday........................... It’s strange that crew members were firing live ammunition with the prop guns in their free time near the set. It seems like a dangerous & unnecessary risk.
Crikey!! I did not know this. And It just confirms to me that there is more to this story than we are being told. Remember, we are talking about Hollywood here, it could take decades for the real truth to emerge.
Bob Fosse
The only decision of guilty or not guilty will be made by a jury.
Charges against Baldwin were dropped, Ms Reed’s trial hasn’t started yet.
fatrainfallingintheforest
I'm going to revisit my earlier statement, in which I said that Baldwin bears some responsibility, and say he wasn't responsible.
He took possession of the weapon with the intention of firing it, as part of the scene. In such cases; taking possession of a weapon you intend to shoot, there's really no reason to make sure it's clear. It wouldn't even make sense to do that.
The armorer, whose responsibility it was to make sure the firearm was safe for use in the scene, be it unloaded, unobstructed, or loaded with blanks, takes all the blame here.