Alec Baldwin may have fired the shot that killed “Rust” cinematographer Halyna Hutchins without pulling the gun’s trigger, a New Mexico prosecutor says.
Santa Fe District Attorney Mary Carmack-Altwies told Vanity Fair she had watched Alec Baldwin’s bombshell interview with ABC in December and was drawn to the actor’s claim that he did not pull the trigger.
“You can pull the hammer back without actually pulling the trigger and without actually locking it,” Carmack-Altwies said. “So you pull it back partway, it doesn’t lock, and then if you let it go, the firing pin can hit the primer of the bullet.”
Baldwin had insisted in the interview that the trigger was never pulled.
“I would never point a gun at anyone and pull the trigger at them, never,” the former “30 Rock” star said.
Carmack-Altwies launched an unofficial investigation of her own to test Baldwin’s claims that he had only pulled back the hammer of the gun before it went off, firing the live bullet that fatally struck Hutchins in the chest and wounded the film’s director Joel Souza, who was hit in the clavicle.
“I didn’t know too much about guns, certainly not about 1850s-era revolvers. So when I first heard that, I was like, ‘Oh, that’s crazy,’ ” she told Vanity Fair.
The DA requested that one of her investigators bring his old-style revolver to her office to test if a mechanical malfunction could have caused the gun to go off. They cleared a room, and she had two investigators inspect the gun to confirm it was not loaded.
Her test revealed that the hammer could have caused the live round to fire, however official results from an FBI analysis of the weapon are still pending.
While Baldwin said he did not pull the trigger, a lawsuit filed by a “Rust” script supervisor in November alleges that he “intentionally” fired the gun at Hutchins.
Lawyers for Halyna Hutchins’ family filed a wrongful-death suit against actor Alec Baldwin on Tuesday.
Baldwin responded with an Instagram post that simply included an image of an art installment from the Parrish Art Museum that says: “Everything is going to be alright.”
Bulchity and the DA has a mental problem. FYI: You dont have to pull the hammer back to Pre act, or to run through an audition, and you sure as hell dont have to point the gun directly at the person or people, and its not even them in the scene. WHY WOULD YOU PULL THE HAMMER BACK AT ALL Unless of Course?
If you were an actor going forward or a producer, would you want to be on the receiving end of a Pre Audition or real Take of a scene with this habitual liar and and manipulator? If the DA is that stupid: who cares. Another OJ SIMPSON CASE CLOSED ^5
The gun was never intended to have a live round in it, and two people assured Mr. Baldwin of such. Based on what he was told, the revolver would not have fired even if he did pull the trigger. Why is this investigation wasting time on Mr. Baldwin when it should be spending time figuring out why there was a live round in the gun, when even the armorer originally claimed no live rounds were on the set?
News flash for you… the PERSON USING THE GUN is Ultimately RESPONSIBLE for it. That is basic procedure for handling a weapon. Actors do not get a pass.
Gun safety 101. Never point an unloaded dun at anyone. But I do agree, why are real weapons and ammunition even on the site? Movie set safety obviously is very flawed. In any case, this is a preventable accident, run by professionals. Someone is to blame.
There shouldn’t have been any live ammunition within 100 miles of that set!! Also, if the weapon were a S&W remake of an 1850’s revolver it could possibly have what’s known as a hammer block. The hammer block is engaged when the hammer is cocked in order to block the hammer nose from protruding through the hammer nose bushing and striking the primer without pulling the trigger. If the hammer is cocked and you then pull the trigger the hammer block moves out of the way to allow the weapon to fire. NO LIVE AMMO SHOULD HAVE EVER BEEN ALLOWED NEAR THOSE WEAPONS!!! THAT’S THE PROBLEM!!!!
It doesn’t matter whether he pulled the trigger or fired by hammer. First thing you learn in gun safety that pulling the gamer back and not easing it down will cause the gun to fire. Heck, I learned that with my cap guns. Thus man never should have been near a gun because he doesn’t even respect them enough to learn about them. He is a mean-spirited cocky Hollywood pissant who thinks he can get away with anything and this time it’s literally murder.
Get a new DA, Guns do not go off by not pulling the trigger. This will be another Hollywood star getting off scott free . Must be a Democrat.
“The DA requested that one of her investigators bring his old-style revolver to her office to test if a mechanical malfunction could have caused the gun to go off. They cleared a room, and she had two investigators inspect the gun to confirm it was not loaded.
“Her test revealed that the hammer could have caused the live round to fire, however official results from an FBI analysis of the weapon are still pending.”
Uh, No. Such a test is invalid. You can not determine if the round would have fired simply because the hammer came back into position. You need, at the very least, a round with a primer installed. Hammer strikes primer, primer goes off and ignites gunpowder charge that propels bullet.
That primer needs to be struck at the proper “rate” – which means not only deep enough by the firing pin (on the hammer) but also at the correct speed.
No primer in place means no validity of test.
How much do you think Baldwin paid for this “test?”