02-21-2023, 05:34 PM
How can a prosector be so incompetent to try to charge someone with a law that was not in effect at the time of the event?
The DA thought she had a case that would make her famous and wanted to go full OJ on Baldwin.
Gil Garcetti screwed up the OJ case, and it was doomed from the beginning.
This particular set armorer didn't have much training and I believe this was her first solo gig.
She was wholly incompetent.
I don't know it's been established that the ammo supplier sent live rounds, unsolicited.
I read one report that some of the live rounds had been reloaded into the company's brass, and that's seems odd to me.
This whole thing was a case of gross incompetence and neglegence before the firearm ever got to Baldwin.
Cheap-skates try and make their own by pulling the bullet, dumping the powder, removing the primer, then re-seating the bullet, so they end up practically indistinguishable from live rounds.
Anybody authorized to handle the ammo and firearm would have easily seen that these were either dummy rounds or at least suspect.
The missing primer would be a clue.
If the primer were replaced, then that's a live round, even without powder in the cartridge, and that's directly what lead to Brandon Lee being killed.
Making dummy rounds, ammo that's supposed to resemble live ammo, would be done so that a scene showing the front of a revolver could show the bullets in the cylinder.
Blanks, ammo intended to discharge to give the look and sound actual ammo, wouldn't look anything like a live round when viewed from that camera angle.
To look like the gun was actually loaded in the scene the cinematographer was pre-flighting, there had to be bullets in the brass.
Rounds that are to be seen in close ups (dummy rounds) have to show bullet (lead or jacket), brass (cartridge), and primer (silver dot at the bottom of the brass) and no powder.
The primer is non-functional, and the BB, as mentioned, provides the rattle to signify there's no powder, and that this is a dummy or inert round.
This is the job of the armorer to have the gun loaded with appropriate ammo for a given scene.
The AD verifies the gun is loaded appropriately.
The actor does what he or she is told.
The first two failed at their job.
Actual live ammo isn't needed to make a movie or TV show, but I can understand that a director might want a particular scene shot with live rounds for realism.
Obviously, this would demand additional awareness and care.
But even blanks can be dangerous or even deadly, as in Jon-Erik Hexum's case.
So scenes with firearms demand a competent experienced armorer and AD.
If Baldwin is convicted, it will be because the jury doesn't like him, not because of actual evidence.
He's made several public appearances since the shooting that show him completely uncaring and sympathetic, and I can see a jury deciding — 'yeah, he's a dick', with the DA's help.
The DA thought she had a case that would make her famous and wanted to go full OJ on Baldwin.
Gil Garcetti screwed up the OJ case, and it was doomed from the beginning.
This particular set armorer didn't have much training and I believe this was her first solo gig.
She was wholly incompetent.
I don't know it's been established that the ammo supplier sent live rounds, unsolicited.
I read one report that some of the live rounds had been reloaded into the company's brass, and that's seems odd to me.
This whole thing was a case of gross incompetence and neglegence before the firearm ever got to Baldwin.
Cheap-skates try and make their own by pulling the bullet, dumping the powder, removing the primer, then re-seating the bullet, so they end up practically indistinguishable from live rounds.
Anybody authorized to handle the ammo and firearm would have easily seen that these were either dummy rounds or at least suspect.
The missing primer would be a clue.
If the primer were replaced, then that's a live round, even without powder in the cartridge, and that's directly what lead to Brandon Lee being killed.
Making dummy rounds, ammo that's supposed to resemble live ammo, would be done so that a scene showing the front of a revolver could show the bullets in the cylinder.
Blanks, ammo intended to discharge to give the look and sound actual ammo, wouldn't look anything like a live round when viewed from that camera angle.
To look like the gun was actually loaded in the scene the cinematographer was pre-flighting, there had to be bullets in the brass.
Rounds that are to be seen in close ups (dummy rounds) have to show bullet (lead or jacket), brass (cartridge), and primer (silver dot at the bottom of the brass) and no powder.
The primer is non-functional, and the BB, as mentioned, provides the rattle to signify there's no powder, and that this is a dummy or inert round.
This is the job of the armorer to have the gun loaded with appropriate ammo for a given scene.
The AD verifies the gun is loaded appropriately.
The actor does what he or she is told.
The first two failed at their job.
Actual live ammo isn't needed to make a movie or TV show, but I can understand that a director might want a particular scene shot with live rounds for realism.
Obviously, this would demand additional awareness and care.
But even blanks can be dangerous or even deadly, as in Jon-Erik Hexum's case.
So scenes with firearms demand a competent experienced armorer and AD.
If Baldwin is convicted, it will be because the jury doesn't like him, not because of actual evidence.
He's made several public appearances since the shooting that show him completely uncaring and sympathetic, and I can see a jury deciding — 'yeah, he's a dick', with the DA's help.