Judge will not dismiss criminal case against Rust armorer
Two years after the death of Halyna Hutchins, the criminal case against the woman who loaded the gun moves forward
Aux News Rust
The criminal case against the armorer for the indie film Rust is moving forward. Earlier today, New Mexico Judge Mary Sommer declined to dismiss the case against Hannah Gutierrez-Reed, the weapons supervisor on set. Gutierrez-Reed’s attorneys argue she can’t receive a fair trial due to some of the “rumors” spread about the defendant. The judge disagreed.
In October 2021, cinematographer Halyna Hutchins was shot and killed when a firearm held by Alec Baldwin accidentally discharged during on-set rehearsals for the film. The case, which had gone through numerous iterations, including a period when Baldwin faced potential jail time for the shooting, continues with a weeklong hearing beginning on August 9, per The Hollywood Reporter.
In recent months, the prosecution has stepped up attacks against Gutierrez-Reed, attempting to portray her as reckless and irresponsible. The original special prosecutor in the case, Andrea Reeb, stepped down in March due to conflicts of interest, but not before being accused of “spreading rumors” about the defendant.
Gutierrez-Reed faces charges of involuntary manslaughter and evidence tampering, referring to an accusation that she attempted to hide narcotics after the shooting, says court documents. Prosecutors also allege that the armorer was drinking on set and was hungover the morning of the shooting. Lawyers for Gutierrez-Reed claim these are unsubstantiated and that they don’t know how one could prove that someone was hungover two years ago.
In a statement to IndieWire in June, Gutierrez-Reed’s lawyer Jason Bowles accused prosecutors of mishandling the case and said that “the case is so weak that they are now resorting to character assassination to further taint the jury pool.”
However, the judge argued that because the preliminary hearing won’t have jurors, there’s no concern of an unfair trial.
14 Comments
The thing that gets me is why the hell live ammo was on set in the first place.
Exactly. Macho culture and it’s getting worse. Rage and tough guys are all the rage.
Ehhhh, I dunno how much you can blame toxic masculinity for the armourer’s……irresponsibility. Chad Stahelski, who not only made the most gun-happy movie series since Charles Bronson died and whose first name is literally “Chad” has precisely zero live firearms on his sets and sees absolutely no use for them.
“Exactly. Macho culture and it’s getting worse.”
What the fuck are you talking about?
What “macho culture”?She’s the armorer. Keeping track of which guns have live ammo and which don’t is literally her job.There can be a valid reason for live ammo for certain shots. Maybe you need to record audio. Maybe you want to get slow motion video of the bullet leaving the chamber. It just has to be handled safely, like any other dangerous stunt or effect.If an actor died while falling off because the stunt coordinator just forgot to tie his wire harness correctly, nobody would blame “macho culture”.
She had access to cool vintage arms and enjoyed shooting tin cans off of fence posts during off hours. I imagine several people on that set thought it was cool and none of them considered the now extremely obvious downside.Yosemite Sam shenanigans are all fun and games until you kill someone’s mom.
Fuckin’ really?!
To be clear, that is my guess.I’ll bet you a buffalo nickel I’m right.
There is absolutely no excuse for it.
Right? The real acid gag in the The Simpson was just that – a gag about the excesses of Hollywood and pretentious directors. Not a suggestion.
In this case, it had nothing to do with directors. From everything I’ve read, it really is just a case of someone being hired for a job they shouldn’t have had, being almost unimaginably negligent.
Yeah I can understand how certain accidents may happen but her allowing live ammo on set is inexcusable.
Good.
Clicked on thumbnail hoping this would be details about the Paul Rust fanfest expo 2023.