Why Prosecutors Rescinded a Lenient Plea Deal They Offered Alec Baldwin last year

[jemgirl90]

Why Prosecutors in the 'Rust' Shooting Case Rescinded a Lenient Plea Deal They Offered Alec Baldwin Last Year https://t.co/mcIl0kHTgV
- People (@people) April 16, 2024
Source:https://twitter.com/people/status/1780357533426647543Read more... )

Comments

[dull_and_wicked]

that plea deal is extraordinarily lenient...a $500 fine when literally someone's life was lost due to neglience from people employed by the producers of this movie seems like a ridiculously low amount

i wonder if it's an ego thing where he doesn't even want to admit guilt/blame in the situation

[ostsiberia]

Seriously, like the ticket in LA for being caught holding your phone while driving is $300+ and he shot someone. $500 is a steal. It's probably an ego thing and also a lack of fear.

[genbu_no_miko24]

"Mr. Baldwin and his counsel were working with the media to generate a campaign designed to deflect attention away from any future plea hearing to protect Mr. Baldwin’s public image,” the prosecutors wrote."

What a dirty and shameful tactic!

I feel like had he just stayed quiet and shown nothing but remorse then he wouldn't have to worry about his public image cause it was already given to him and he probably could've gotten a more lenient sentencing. No one criticized him super harshly in Hollywood (except for George Clooney and granted he was right) and had a lot of sympathy.

I'm not sure what the appropriate sentencing for Alec should be but that original sentence is an insult and super light!!

[anterrabre]

When your clownery comes back to haunt you, lol. He should have just taken the deal instead of having his lawyers be in cahoots with the news media.

[xdecadentx]

Anyone better with law, what are the chances of anything sticking with him?

I can see the armourer, but less with him.

[insomniachobs]

It doesn't seem cut and dry by any means, but I wouldn't have been nearly so confident that I'd have thrown away that absolute gift of a plea deal. I think a lot is going to depend on how it's framed in court, but cases have been made from less. He was ultimately the one with the gun in his hands, it's debatable whether he played his own part in safety checks*, and the more people that get convicted the harder it is to claim his producer hands were clean of every negligent decision that led up to this. A good prosecutor could make a lot of that.

*Not that the actor is supposed to be a gun expert and do the check themselves, but apparently best practice is that they watch the armourer check the gun and then the armourer hands it immediately to them, no time lapse.

[aristobrit]

If the prosecutor can't make his case, he should be fired. Baldwin pulled the trigger, more than once. They tested the gun, it didn't misfire accidentally, he did it.

He's worked on multiple films where he's fired guns, including a Mission Impossible film, and you know Cruise does everything by the book on his sets, so Baldwin knew the procedures and knew they weren't being followed on Rust. For his own safety he should have checked the gun. Many actors do. They refuse to even touch the gun if they don't either watch it being loaded or watch it being checked before it's handed to them. They could be called as an example of how it's a standard part of the industry.

There's footage of rehearsals on Rust where he isn't following safety procedures and he's pointing a gun at fellow actors and crew members. Someone physically goes up to him and tells him to stop it.

He was deliberately careless and I'm sure there's more evidence than what I've outlined. I can't believe he will be found innocent.

[treats]

where s the TTPD leak post? Its awful lmfoa

[martymcfly85]

send me a link please!

[treats]

i can't dm u!

[martymcfly85]

I added you as a friend!