Is Alec Baldwin Going to Jail for the Death of Halyna Hutchins?

Is Alec Baldwin Going to Jail for the Death of Halyna Hutchins?

Shootings on set shouldn’t happen. What happened here and who is going to pay for it?
🚀For a LIMITED TIME get CuriosityStream AND Nebula for 26% OFF!

Welcome back to LegalEagle. The most avian legal analysis on the internets.
🚀 Extended & ad-free versions on Nebula/CuriosityStream!
👔 Suits by Indochino!

Send me an email:

Interested in LAW SCHOOL? Get my guide to law school!
Need help with COPYRIGHT? I built a course just for you!

Tik Tok:

Please email my agent & manager at

Sorry, occupational hazard: This is not legal advice, nor can I give you legal advice. I AM NOT YOUR LAWYER. Sorry! Everything here is for informational purposes only and not for the purpose of providing legal advice. You should contact your attorney to obtain advice with respect to any particular issue or problem. Nothing here should be construed to form an attorney-client relationship. Also, some of the links in this post may be affiliate links, meaning, at no cost to you, I will earn a small commission if you click through and make a purchase. But if you click, it really helps me make more of these videos! All non-licensed clips used for fair use commentary, criticism, and educational purposes. See Hosseinzadeh v. Klein, 276 F.Supp.3d 34 (S.D.N.Y. 2017); Equals Three, LLC v. Jukin Media, Inc., 139 F. Supp. 3d 1094 (C.D. Cal. 2015).

Special thanks:
Stock video and imagery provided by Getty Images
Music provided by Epidemic Sound
Short links by (

You may also like...

49 Responses

  1. Emerald Mann says:

    Weird how there was a strike about lack of proper safety protocol, and then someone died and another was injured due to lack of safety protocol. Almost like the protocols are there for a reason.

    • JC Spoon says:

      This could also be motivation for sabotage.
      Not that it seems such measures were needed to achieve this result.

    • Brian Johnson says:

      Be careful. You’re inviting someone against protocols existing to argue that the bullet was placed in the gun on purpose by someone in the crew trying to support their argument that the set wasn’t being run properly.

      I, FYI don’t think that happened. I think it’s more likely that the crew was genuinely negligent.

    • JC Spoon says:

      @Brian Johnson Agreed, but this is the US.
      You really think people are going to pursue reality and accept the results of an investigation?

    • itchykami says:

      Alec is probably more culpable as the producer than as the shooter. He was cavalier about so many regulations in this production. It just so happened that he was the one who killed someone.

    • Jason Patterson says:

      And yet all we hear are complaints about unnecessary regulations slowing everything down, nanny state this and nanny state that.

  2. darkninjafirefox says:

    This whole thing is a prompt reminder that regulations and safety protocols are written in blood. Don’t take them for granted

    • Andrew Logan says:

      My instructor on an explosive training course said every rule was there because someone died.

    • KingDetonation says:

      @karrotlord As one guy said, “Guns don’t kill people. People kill people.”

    • andypants1000 says:

      “But but there hasn’t been an accident in years! Do we really need these regulations that are holding businesses back? They can regulate themselves” They cry. Ignoring the fact that its thanks to those regulations nobody died.

    • Nope says:

      My whole job revolves around that, enforcing laws that were enacted because many people died. But don’t worry, that doesn’t stop EVERYONE from still complaining about having to follow those laws.

    • Stephanie Alicia says:

      Wow 👏👏👏I’ve never heard it explained this way!

  3. Marco Meijer says:

    I’d imagine that it’s perfectly reasonable to expect no live bullets on sets.

    • j.oz says:

      @rataflechera Oh good. I guess on average Ms. Hutchins is alive then.
      Doing an additional check to verify the gun is not loaded does not add a failure point, it adds an additional safeguard – and it’s something that basic firearm safety demands. A person handling a firearm has a fundamental responsibility to know what he or she is doing, which includes knowing the condition of the weapon. That’s the absolute bare minimum for something like this.

    • Kimberly Carrigan says:

      No. It’s never reasonable to expect a gun to be unloaded

    • rataflechera says:

      @j.oz verifying that it is empty is likely easy. Verifying that it has dummies instead of bullets is less so. If the prop is ready for a close up take you might want a special configuration: a blank in the first chamber and dummies in the visible chambers of the cylinder; and you don’t want the actor to mess with that configuration.

      This is not what happened here. If it was a rehearsal a completely non-functional gun should have been used. If fake props are not available (i.e. blue guns, which are more common with pistols than with revolvers), then a completely unloaded gun should have been used. Something with no even dummies. That would be easy to verify and wouldn’t likely introduce a further risk if both assistant director Hall who handled the weapon, and Baldwin who hold it has verified.

      But that would mean that protocols shall be modified for how actors handle props in different states of production, just in case the protocols of prop masters and armorers have failed in just those instances.

    • Joe Benz says:

      @FatQuickscope41 In that case the investigators need to take the bullet shell form the gun and check if there are any finger prints?

    • j.oz says:

      @rataflechera If handling a firearm is part of your job, then firearms safety is part of your job. Period. That includes knowing what you need to look for in order to follow the Four Rules. If you can’t personally verify the weapon is in a safe condition, you have no business pulling the trigger.

  4. condutchak says:

    A report has come out that, on the Nicholas Cage film that Reed worked on prior, multiple misfires and unannounced test shots occurred on set to the point that Cage got in her face, screamed at her for not practicing proper safety protocols and then stormed off set. It seems that Reed has a bad reputation as is, and I doubt she’ll work ever again.

  5. PaulXPZ says:

    Kinda glossed over the armorer. Like the AD she has a history of negligence on previous projects. Nic Cage reportedly yelled at her and walked off set for firing a prop gun so close to him it nearly blew out his eardrum

    • Robert Jenkins says:

      @Sio Ward I’m pretty sure that you are mixing up two separate reports. There was a report that the armorer was involved in an incident with Nick Cage which caused Cage to yell at her; I think I read it in NYT. This is separate and distinct from the other report(s) about the AD, such as the one that resulted in him getting fired.

    • Excellent says:

      These issues are covered 22:53

    • Pandora says:

      @Thomas Becker I was looking for this comment. This is what happens when people are giving jobs to friends and family who don’t have the experience to get these jobs. It would have taken her years of industry experience to get a job on Nic Cage’s set and I would imagine that she would have been blacklisted after her first incident. I think there’s more to the story.

    • ejonp says:

      @thesenceofmorality No, this story was the armorer. The AD was *fired* from a previous job over a gun mishap that wounded a crew member. There were SO MANY red flags that it’s easy to get hem mixed up.

    • Ryan Jardee says:

      @Alfred Lear Nepotism kills

  6. godothunder8882 says:

    I’d like to correct a statement from the video. Devin states that “cold gun” means a weapon contains blanks, not rounds that fire lead. This is incorrect. A “cold gun” is one that is not loaded at all. It would be any weapon that is incapable of firing a projectile, making a “bang”, or a muzzle flash. A weapon loaded with blanks is deemed a “hot weapon” on set.

    When someone announces “hot weapon” it’s usually followed by an explanation of how many rounds we, as crew, should expect to hear fired, along with who will be firing them.

    There is NEVER a reason to have a weapon on set with live rounds that throw lead.

    • FroCat says:

      That last bit is exactly what I said. Why the hell are there live rounds anywhere _NEAR_ a film set?

    • F16 says:

      @Marc Whinery Agree with everything you said, but hopefully any dummy rounds would have a spent primer. But even that would be no guarantee, as it could be live round that someone tried to fire, but the primer didn’t ignite and the round got recycled and mixed in with the dummies.

    • FloridaManStrong says:

      @Fred Hugo blanks can kill… That’s a horrible suggestion

    • Marc Whinery says:

      @F16 a dummy should have a real-looking primer, so that a shot from the back looks real.

      A dummy should have a sign that is visible when held in the hand, but should be 100% real-looking when loaded in a revolver.

    • LeopardJoy says:

      @Shannon Key The Colt 45 Pietta (that AB shot) is a replica of an antique gun…. not old.

  7. Scotty D. says:

    I can imagine multiple people could be charged with manslaughter or negligence, especially the armorer on set and the AD who declared it a cold gun beforehand.

  8. Lazy Lion Animation says:

    Really appreciate the call outs to IATSE and the struggles they’re going through to fight for better conditions. It’s been exhausting to see all these people, who work so hard to make the invisible art of film making happen, not get recognized for their work and get treated so poorly because of it. Thanks for making this video to help get the info out there and providing your views on the case.

    • Thomas Becker says:

      IATSE is a farce. Their leadership is just there to collect dues, and generally couldn’t care less about the well-being of actual members. I know states like CA have extremely good labor laws; members should file grievances with the labor department, but never seem to.

    • dwc1964 says:

      @Thomas Becker a union is as strong as its membership; how many members actively participate in the union, aside from simply paying dues and leaving it to “the professionals” to speak and act on their behalf? A fighting union is made up of _active_ members, who go to the meetings to raise their concerns, and run & vote for an activist slate of officers if the current ones aren’t doing what’s needed. Bureaucrats can only get away with being useless if the membership lets them; and I’ve known several shop stewards who’ve tried their damndest to get their membership actively involved in changing things, only to be told “good luck”.

    • Thomas Becker says:

      @dwc1964 Until they get rid of lameduck leadership, and actually want to work *with* the studio system instead of against it, it’s a moot point. Part of the discussion needs to be getting rid of useless jobs that only still exist because they generate dues.

    • Lazy Lion Animation says:

      @Thomas Becker Seems like you have all the answers. Perhaps you should consider applying to help and take a leadership position.

  9. Arturo Aguilar says:

    Loading real bullets on a prop gun to film with a crew that has an history of not having adequate safety protocols was a tragedy waiting to happen…

  10. Enormhi says:

    It certainly sounds like a LOT of negligence occurred on this set, as well as a totally unqualified armourer

    • Joe M says:

      @VisseNekku No her father is Thell Reed, who is probably one of the top armorers and gun coaches in Hollywood. She doesn’t seem to have much qualification beyond that.

    • VisseNekku says:

      @Joe M Okay in that case she would be grossly unqualified.

    • Joe M says:

      @VisseNekku Yeah, I don’t think Baldwin is actually the one the DA is looking at charging since two separate people were supposed to check the firearm before he even was allowed to lay hands on it, but rather her if it turns out she was being negligent and maybe the person that’s supposed to double check her work. There was no reason for this tragedy to happen outside of someone not doing their job.

    • HesZedJim says:

      @VisseNekku under qualified by experience. He mentioned she had only worked on set once before? Can’t remember exactly. Regardless, that pushes the blame (if it was her negligence) to the person who cut corners and hired her imho

    • HesZedJim says:

      @Robby Maddox hiring unqualified armorers would be a damn good reason to blame the higher ups too

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *