Comment on Alec Baldwin's manslaughter trial over Rust shooting has been dismissed
AngryishHumanoid@reddthat.com 2 months ago
Once it came out that there were live rounds found in other places that were never mentioned until now… yeah that’s not a good look. And while I understand the argument that he’s the producer therefore responsible for anything that happens on set but they’d be setting a standard that wasn’t applied in an awful lot of past on set accidents.
SchmidtGenetics@lemmy.world 2 months ago
Which has nothing to do with this decision. This what about due process by the police, nothing to do with actual fault.
As producer he should still hold the final culpability of anyone and anything on site. It would be like letting the owner of a company walk on a technicality, he’s still responsible in the end.
Infynis@midwest.social 2 months ago
So standard practice
SchmidtGenetics@lemmy.world 2 months ago
In Canada there’s laws that can hold the owner accountable for stuff like this.
Bill C45 in Canada
AngryishHumanoid@reddthat.com 2 months ago
Sorry I thought I was making it clear that the dismissal was due to the negligence of the police, but even if it had gone to trial it was still an uphill battle to claim his responsibility as producer. If the armorer could be proven to have been a bad hire it could have fallen on him, maybe, but if the production could prove that they took reasonable steps to see if she was qualified but were sadly mistaken that would make it hard to prove negligence.
Personally I would rather it had gone to trial and given the full chance under the law to prove innocence or guilt, dismissal with prejudice is not the same thing as a finding of not guilty even if the result is the same.
SchmidtGenetics@lemmy.world 2 months ago
It’s interesting seeing the law differences, in Canada this would be considered criminal.
Westray bill c45
protist@mander.xyz 2 months ago
What you’re describing would be civil liability, not criminal. It would potentially be criminal if a supervisor knew one of their direct reports was doing something illegal and condoned it or did nothing, but that doesn’t seem to be the case here
SchmidtGenetics@lemmy.world 2 months ago
In Canada it would be criminal and not civil.
It comes down to who has directly authority over someone though iirc.
protist@mander.xyz 2 months ago
I bet Canada’s putting a ton of CEOs in jail, right?
Arbiter@lemmy.world 2 months ago
I’m glad someone has and enforces some sane laws.
PunnyName@lemmy.world 2 months ago
What about the people who actually committed the crime?
SchmidtGenetics@lemmy.world 2 months ago
Unless they get off on this due process as well, they would also be accountable.
AngryishHumanoid@reddthat.com 2 months ago
I strongly disagree. You can vet someone properly, they can have good references, work experience and history, then they come in and do something stupid and it still falls on someone else? If they did the appropriate amount of due diligence (and can show that) I don’t see why someone else’s mistake would roll up like that.