Rust armorer Hannah Gutierrez-Reed sentenced to 18 months in prison
Gutierrez-Reed received the maximum possible sentence following her conviction
Aux News Hannah Gutierrez
Hannah Gutierrez-Reed, who was found guilty last month of involuntary manslaughter for her role in the death of Halyna Hutchins on the set of Western film Rust, was sentenced to 18 months in prison today. Per Variety, this was the maximum possible sentence for her conviction.
While delivering the sentence in the New Mexico courthouse, Judge Mary Marlowe Sommer did not hold back, saying that Gutierrez-Reed had not demonstrated remorse for her actions. “Your attorney had to tell the court you were remorseful,” the judge said, per NBC News. “You were the armorer who stood between a safe weapon and a weapon that could kill someone. For you, she would be alive.”
Hutchins’ mother, close friends, and colleague Joel Souza also spoke ahead of the sentencing, mourning the loss of the cinematographer. “What I want is simply not possible. What I want is, everyone is OK and lives aren’t destroyed,” Souza, who was also injured in the shooting, said on a virtual call into the proceedings.
It’s unclear at this point what bearing, if any, Gutierrez-Reed’s outcome will have on Alec Baldwin, the man who fired the gun the armorer supplied. His manslaughter trial is set for July. Baldwin also faces up to 18 months in prison if convicted.
33 Comments
I would expect Baldwin to get the same 18 months. Turns out, Guiterrez-Reed should have pled!
While Gutierrez-Reed is probably right in considering herself a scapegoat for a production that went off the rails in terms of safety, there’s also this: Special prosecutors listed a slew of alleged misconduct by
Gutierrez-Reed from after her arrest claiming she drank alcohol while
she was out pending trial “contrary to her conditions of release,”
encouraged her mom to confront prosecutors while in the bathroom at
court; and she attempted to lie to prosecutors about her work history to
give the impression she was working full time prior to trial.And this:Gutierrez Reed’s jail calls show[ed] she is not remorseful, and still pins the blame on others, including Baldwin, the film’s producers, and the paramedics who tended to Hutchins after she was shot…she also called the jurors “idiots” and made disparaging remarks about the judge and the prosecutor.Marlowe Sommer took note of those calls before issuing the sentence, saying that they showed she did not deserve probation. She also noted that at no point in her statement did Gutierrez Reed say she was sorry for what she had done.Judges do have discretion, and when you have one that’s already inclined to show prejudice (something that Sommer was counseled about after her first few years on the bench), you’re an utter moron if you make negative comments about them and their courtroom that can be used against you – especially prior to a verdict.Fair or not, she’s lucky that the involuntary manslaughter conviction had a maximum term of 18 months.
While I agree that none of that is a good look, I do still think that 18 months is a harsh sentence for what amounts to basic incompetence at your job.
I don’t necessarily disagree that 18 months is harsh, but I’ve been basically incompetent at my job hundreds of times and never got anyone killed or even injured. Actually given Cogent’s information, I’d say what might have been an overly harsh sentence actually seems much more reasonable. I mean, say what you will about Baldwin’s behavior following this whole thing, he’s absolutely shown himself to be remorseful many times. She couldn’t even say she was sorry during her statement?
That’s a fair point
There are simply jobs where you can’t be “basically incompetent” and an armorer is one of them. For instance, I’ve worked in nonferrous foundries most of my life, and now am an owner of one. Incompetence ends up being life-changing injuries or death. I’ve seen some god-awful shit, from a hand being cut off on a metal saw, to an arm being crushed to paste in a mold press, a guy’s pinky finger torn off on a Bridgeport, to 2,000 degree metal being splashed onto someone disfiguring them forever. I should note, most of that stuff was due to what I’d label complacency more than incompetence. Most of those accidents involved workers with 10-20 years in the industry (not the pinky guy, he was a moron, and that was completely incompetent). Not following every step of safety protocols, because you’ve done it for so long you think you know what you’re doing, and it won’t happen to me, is pretty much what you’re constantly fighting in human nature when it comes to setting safety protocols for dangerous jobs. When it comes to Gutierrez-Reed, she didn’t even have the experience to become complacent. She was incompetent from the start.
She’s done a month, and 18 months never means 18 months.I think she’s something of a scapegoat, but it’s not like she got years.
Depends on the state. In California she’d not be in prison long enough to need to do laundry. In New Mexico, I suspect they aren’t hurting for space in prison so she will probably serve a lot longer
TBF when your basic incompetence at your job gets someone killed, eighteen months in the pokey seems pretty light in comparison.
It’s not basic incompetence. Basic incompetence in the prop department would be leaving the right character bin at the lockup or packing the wrong purses.An armorer allowing real bullets to be mixed in with blanks is absolute negligence.
I do still think that 18 months is a harsh sentence for what amounts to basic incompetence at your job. Someone fucking died because of her gross incompetence. 18 months isn’t enough.
She’s not a scapegoat for anything. The set armorer allowed REAL (as in “intended to propel a projectile” and “designed use for target practice and self-defense”) BULLETS in her prop guns.I don’t give a flying fuck what the rest of the set does, there’s absolutely no excuse for someone in that position to allow that to happen. It’s pure negligence, and whatever other peripheral stuff went wrong (like the AD physically handling the gun, which a competent armorer would never have allowed either), it all comes back to the fact that there were REAL BULLETS loaded into that gun, which shouldn’t have been anywhere near anything she had control over.
You should give a fuck what the rest of the set does, because even before the tragedy the camera crew walked off over safety concerns. Gutierrez-Reed was only hired because more experienced armorers passed on the job, likely due to the budget shenanigans the producers were pulling. This shit doesn’t happen in a vacuum. I think Gutierrez-Reed is responsible for Hutchins’ death, but I don’t think pointing out all of the ways the set was dangerous absolves her in any way.
I took issue with calling her a scapegoat. She’s not a scapegoat. Yes, it’s perfectly true that there were other issues before this, and if you want to argue that the set should have been shut down for safety concerns before Hutchins was killed, I wouldn’t argue that— I wasn’t there, but it certainly sounded like people were concerned.But none of that changes the fact that REAL BULLETS being in a gun has one-and only one-point of failure, and that is Gutierrez-Reed. She’s not a scapegoat.
Oh ok, I understand where you’re coming from now. I agree that Gutierrez-Reed is – as far as I’m aware – solely responsible for live ammunition being on the set, which directly led to Hutchins’ death. However, I can understand why someone would argue that the producers are using her *as* a scapegoat. Several of the producers have a history of cutting corners in the budget and ignoring the kinds of safety practices that are meant to prevent a tragedy like this one. In this case, Hutchins’ may have been the only one criminally negligent, but I’m skeptical that the producers have learned any lessons given that the $100,000 OSHA fine amounts to a slap on the wrist, and the civil settlement they reached with Hutchins’ family hinges on the movie being completed and released, which I think will create a chilling effect on any other lawsuits. I could be (and hope that I am) wrong. But if I’m not, then the producers will have essentially been rewarded for making a film that cost someone her life. Even if there were never any live bullets on set, someone could have (and probably would have) gotten hurt some other way. We already know that big businesses view breaking the law as simply the cost of doing business*, and IMO there’s little reason to think movie producers don’t view productions the same way. Maybe that stretches the definition of “scapegoat” too far, but I can definitely see how someone would perceive the producers using Gutierrez-Reed’s culpability and conviction to draw attention away from their pattern of running unsafe productions and avoid any meaningful punishment.* https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Roy_Shapira/publication/374196222_THE_CHALLENGE_OF_HOLDING_BIG_BUSINESS_ACCOUNTABLE/links/65137fbbf91aee386e6e7a4c/THE-CHALLENGE-OF-HOLDING-BIG-BUSINESS-ACCOUNTABLE.pdf
Serious question:Why the prison sentence for Gutierrez-Reed when Brandon Lee’s death on The Crow set was considered negligence and settled out of court. Shouldn’t the armorer on that set been thrown into a lengthy court battle with a prison term? The gun in this instance was not properly checked and had a squib load in it.The fact that this happened and nobody talks about it is sad.
I wasn’t around during that, but I think the addition of live rounds is probably the key difference. A squib, improperly checked or not, is still a reasonable expectation on a movie set. A real bullet is not. Also, I believe a lot of modern safety regulations regarding guns were drawn up in the wake of that incident, so while it might not have been ethically excusable for the armorer or anyone else to have failed to check the gun in that instance, it’s criminal now because those regulations have been in place for decades and there’s no excuse for anyone to fail them.
I wasn’t around during that, but I think the addition of live rounds is probably the key difference. A squib, improperly checked or not, is still a reasonable expectation on a movie set. A real bullet is not. That’s basically the long and short of it. Gutierrez-Reed knew actual bullets were likely on set, purportedly plinking with crewmembers on one night at least. That she didn’t keep track of those rounds, and that they were mixed in with dummies, shouldn’t even have been a consideration because you never, EVER, allow live rounds onto a set. It’s basic shit. On top of that she has never been contrite, which goes a long way in a case like this. She did give a rote, “I’m sorry” but apparently didn’t know her jailhouse calls were recorded? Because, holy shit, did that sink her. Not only did she blame everyone else, she basically said, shit happens, and people need to get over it.
Brandon Lee’s incident was a bizarre and never before seen confluence of circumstances that changed basic protocol and everyone involved wasn’t just contrite, but it sent them into a spiral of depression that some barely recovered from. And there was a court case, but it was civil, so behind the scenes, and a private settlement was reached. In the Crow case dummies were made on site, which is completely normal, but the primer wasn’t removed from at least one of the dummies. At some point filming what would be the prior scene to the accident the hammer hit the primer and dislodged the bullet into the barrel. There wouldn’t even been a noticeable noise. Nobody knew a bullet was sitting in that barrel when it was then loaded with blanks. So when the blank was fired for the scene the bullet traveled out of the barrel striking Lee. Not clearing a barrel is negligent, yes, but it was pretty much considered an impossibility that using dummies on a very well run tight set, which the Crow was, could result in what it did. Since then protocol is to shine an LED flashlight down the barrel to see it is clear. OTOH, in the Rust case, live fucking ammunition was allowed onto the set by Gutierrez-Reed. She loaded a real fucking bullet into an on-set gun. Hutchins wasn’t the victim of an unforeseen confluence of events. She was shot point blank by a .44 magnum round that shouldn’t have been within a million miles of a movie set. It’s something that shouldn’t be remotely possible on a movie set. On top of that, both in the video right after the incident, where she was like, I guess my career is over, rather caring about what was happening, and her endless lack of any empathy, and blaming everything on everyone else guaranteed a maximum sentence. Text messages show she was getting fucked up many nights after shooting, and after the event tried to coerce witnesses. So that’s the difference. With Brandon Lee’s death everyone involved was crushed and wanted to make sure this could never happen again. With Gutierrez-Reed her argument was my incompetence was someone else’s fault and I could care less.
Cool, thanks for the info. Much appreciated.
Circumstances were different that case went to court and I believed it was seen as a complete accident and actually changed procedures ,that sadly were not followed in this case . Actually it had a shaved piece of a previous round stuck on the side of the barrel , which the blank discharged it making it a projectile .
Why the prison sentence for Gutierrez-Reed when Brandon Lee’s death on The Crow set was considered negligence and settled out of court.
Because the industry responded after Lee’s death and rules were changed/put in place specifically to prevent something like that happening again. Gutierrez-Reed ignored those rules and someone died as a direct result.
“What I want is simply not possible. What I want is, everyone is OK and
lives aren’t destroyed,” Souza, who was also injured in the shooting,
said on a virtual call into the proceedings. Seriously? That’s pretty smug for the director in charge of the set.What I want is a director that knows WTF they’re doing, and doesn’t sacrifice safety to save a few bucks.Talk about a complete lack of accountability/remorse.
You have obviously never been on a set and clearly have no idea what a director does. Since you clearly don’t know, they give full control of any prop, from guns to whatever, to the crews that should know what they’re doing, and mostly sit down and watch their work and maybe give tips to the cinematographer on angles if it’s not meeting the shot they wanted. Prop and stunt work is it’s own animal, and director’s respect that. Not to mention, what a weird take. Souza was shot too. That’s pretty much the max of accountability.
John Landis? Is that you?He’s lucky he’s not in Georgia.
SAVANNAH, Ga. (AP) — The director of an ill-fated movie about singer
Gregg Allman says it’s “ultimately my responsibility” that his crew
ended up on a Georgia railroad bridge in the path of a freight train
that killed a camera assistant.Midnight Rider director Randall Miller issued a statement to
The Associated Press on Friday, less than two weeks after he pleaded
guilty to charges of involuntary manslaughter and criminal trespassing.https://www.usatoday.com/story/life/movies/2015/03/22/allman-film-director-accepts-full-blame-for-train-death/25183821/
Oh, so you’re stupid, and can’t read a totally different situation that you just googled. But good on you for a strawman.
I accept your apology.
Christ, take the L.
Directors aren’t in charge of budgeting. That responsibility falls onto the back of the producers. Also, directors jobs aren’t really logistical, but moreso to determine the actual artistic scope of the movie. Production managers are the ones that actually make sure that there is safety on set. Unless there is a seriously reckless case of the director actively making a decision that would put people in harms way (which is in no way what actually happened here), the director wouldn’t really be at fault here.
Next up Mr Baldwin….you might think about making no plans in the foreseeable future
But wait a minute. I want to blame Baldwin!!!!
Then go ahead dumdum
Keep scrolling through my comment history and responding to every single one with sad pathetic internet tough guy jargon my good friend. It totally proves how little my supposed “trolling” is getting under your skin.I hope you can find peace to soothe the obvious anger in your heart.I love you, Pookie. XOXOXO