Estimated reading time: 2 minutes
Last week, a jury has found Hannah Gutierrez-Reed, the armorer on the set of “Rust,” guilty of involuntary manslaughter.
This verdict comes after the tragic 2021 shooting of cinematographer Halyna Hutchins on the film’s set in Sante Fe, where actor Alec Baldwin fired a gun containing a live round, unknowingly causing Hutchins’ death.
During a tense courtroom scene, the jury, after careful deliberation, delivered their verdict. They acquitted Gutierrez-Reed of tampering with evidence but held her responsible for Hutchins’ death.
As the verdict was read, the court asked each jury member to confirm their agreement, ensuring the verdict reflected the collective decision of the jury.
The judge emphasized the gravity of the case, noting the loss of life and the criminal negligence involved.
Despite arguments from the defense regarding Gutierrez-Reed’s compliance with court proceedings and her lack of prior violations, the judge decided to remand her into custody, considering the severity of the conviction.
SEE ALSO: Hochul Defends Decision to Ban National Guard’s Long Guns in NYC Subway Security
In her concluding remarks, the judge addressed the jury, acknowledging their service and the high-profile nature of the trial. She emphasized the jurors’ right to privacy and the choice to speak about the case as per their discretion.
After the verdict was announced last Wednesday, she was taken into custody.
One juror, speaking to KOB 4, revealed that the jury believed Hutchins’ death could have been prevented by Gutierrez-Reed, indicating a significant oversight in safety protocols on set.
The sentencing for Gutierrez-Reed is scheduled for April 15 at 10 a.m., with Judge Mary Marlowe Sommer presiding.
The conviction could result in up to 18 months in prison for Gutierrez-Reed.
Do you think Gutierrez-Reed should spend time behind bars? And if so, for how long?
*** Buy and Sell on GunsAmerica! All Local Sales are FREE! ***
NO TIME!! It was Baldwin’s fault
No, her negligence, along with Baldwin’s, resulted in someone getting killed. Time for her, time for him. Doing otherwise is just letting one’s political views get in the way of justice.
I fear all blame will fall on her, not the fact that the chain of contact with the firearm went to a middleman before it was handed to Baldwin, or the fact that Baldwin ignored all safety rules in handling the firearm. I had read many times that in actual filmed gun fights, the actors never actually aim a firearm at their intended target when they are shooting, aiming off to the side, as there is still the wad in the blank round that has enough force at close range, to injure, and in the case of one idiot actor who put a .45 auto to his head and pulled the trigger to impress an actress, die by the wad entering his brain. If that is a rule of the set, then Baldwin aimed the gun at her and pulled the trigger, maybe he was the one who put the live round in too. Has anybody investigated the relationship between Baldwin and Hutchins?
you’re calling that right!!! I have also wondered if he was diddling her and she got too serious so he got rid of the problem…………
Honestly, her AND Baldwin need to go to jail for the same amount of time!! Any body that knows 𝘼𝙉𝙔𝙃𝙄𝙉𝙂 about weapons, knows they should inspect and clear the weapon before they take control of it! And as we all know, guns just don’t “go off”! SOMETHING/ BODY has to touch/pull the trigger, and a revolver has to have the hammer back to fire in the first place, unless it doesn’t have a transfer bar, but even then, it needs to be dropped or struck to fire.
Firearms safety rules are Universal, simple, 100% fail safe and have not changed for over 500 years.
She and Baldwin should both spend time behind bars for this tragic event. Should get additional time for being ignorant but I guess there aren’t any laws against that.
Baldwin pulled the trigger. In any other case the person who pulled the trigger would be held liable. Ultimately he should be held liable.
harried hannah-of-the-two-jobs, was not onhand nor apparently onset (tho seemingly onsite) and performing other jobly duties, when The Gun, left on the cart apparently on orders of the asst director (and highly likely The Producer) when The Gun was grzbbed-up by the a.d.
The propmaster throeing out two boxes of rounds (dummy? blank? live?) Needs some more investigation, having been revealed as facts-entered-in-evidence, aa well as some more attention to the plinking with live ammo, as reported very early-on, and where did the one box of ammo come from which appeared onsite (and was incorporated into the supply).
Plus, we now see what Himself obviously wouldnt have wanted seen, of Himself bossing the crew to more speed, cmon, hurry, hurry, and bullying them by waving and pointing THAT GUN at people as a maestro would His baton.
Very bad form, that!
Himself is hugely, largely, (bigly, even) responsible for The Unpleasant Incident.
I would not have allowed Himself to bully me, not for a mere 8,000$ as reported for both jobs she was doing.
Her lackadaisical attitude towards her job and gun safety, or lack thereof, has put her in this unfortunate situation. It cost another human being their life. And if that script didn’t call for Baldwin to pull the trigger during that scene, he’s just as responsible. If the script DID called for him to point the gun and pull the trigger, then he did what he was suppose to do and it’s totally the armorers’ fault.
Should that young lady get jail time? In my opinion – NO. A large fine, probation, maybe even community service – yes.
As far as ‘Mr. Personality’ is concerned … There’s an old say; “money talks, and bullshit walks”. That pile of “bullshit” will probably never see the court room.
The person with the weapon in hand,that cocked it while it was pointed in an unsafe manner after failing to inspect it for live ammo is the one responsible.
She was careless in her duties but she did not pull the trigger.
This should pave the way for jurors to find Alec Baldwin, the moron who actually pulled the trigger of the gun he pointed at Halyna Hutchins, as proven in court, guilty also and lock the anti-gun felon up! But I suspect he and his Hollywood money will buy off both the judge and jurors selected in his case.
I don’t think any prison time is needed. From what I gather about all this is it was an accident .
an accident due to incompetence that resulted in a death. She should go to prison, so should Baldwin.
Five years probation, large fine and court costs. Even though he’s a douche, if convicted, I’d recommend the same for Baldwin.
Just because a gun is involved doesn’t mean the sentencing should be any harsher than those given out for deaths caused by careless/reckless drivers or, in these days, previously convicted criminals.
Regardless of all other comment – Why was there ANY live ammo on the set?
Baldwin is absolutely the guilty individual in this tragedy. He violated or dumbed-up to every basic rule of handling a firearm. Only point in safe direction, assure weapon is unloaded, and keep finger off of trigger until ready to fire. While the pistol had no reason to have live rounds in it, Alex Balwin is the one accountable and not the armorer to a great extent. When is Balwin’s trial??
The same universal, simple, 100% fail safe firearms safety rules have remand unchanged for nearly 600 years.
The armorer is in part responsible for the safety of all who handle weapons on set. That being said, ultimately the person or person who has the gun in their hand is responsible. As every single person who has ever held a gun and knows anything about gun safety know the first rules of safety, treat EVERY gun as loaded, confirm for yourself that the gun is not loaded, and NEVER point a gun at ANYTHING you do not intend to destroy. As she is convicted, the person who held the gun is equally responsible, anything less is in no way equal justice.
Events and miscalculations leading up to a live round being in the revolver is something to be concerned about. BUT IT DOES NOT IN ANY WAY ABSOLVE THE PRIMARY RESPONSIBILITY OF BALDWIN COMMITING MURDER BY POINTING A FIREARM AT A LIVING HUMAN BEING. HIS FINGER WAS ON THE TRIGGER, IT DOESN’T HAVE TO BE PULLED!
HE STATED THAT HE WAS TOLD TO POINT THE GUN AT HER BY THE DIRECTOR!
BRAINLESS TWIT!
If somebody told you to jump off the Brooklyn Bridge would you do it?
NOT AGAIN!
Tommy Smothers
It’s illegal to bring live ammunition onto a movie set, whoever brought it in is the guilty party, the rest is a sad chain of events facilitated by incompetence…
As a armorer on a movie set, her job is to load, unload, hand gun to actor and retrieve gun after the scene is shot. Checking the gun before and after it leaves her hands and anytime the actor touches it. The actor usually doesn’t know anything about guns, nor is it his job to. That is ALL her job and no one else can be blamed ! There shouldn’t have been any live ammo anywhere near the set !! If she was doing her job, none of this would have happened !! 18 months isn’t anywhere near enough ! 5 years minimum and never being allowed near a gun or movie set ! She couldn’t even stop someone being killed with a prop gun !!
Maybe DEI should be on trial.
That’s an amazingly unrelated and racist comment. The armorer is the daughter of an experienced and long-respected armorer on movie sets. In this case, this young woman, early twenties, was not in control of the armory. It has nothing to do with her heritage. And, just a reminder, Hispanics were in this part of America before Anglos (first from Spain then from Mexico). That’s why there are so many Spanish names. Oh, like California, Colorado, Texas, New Mexico, Nevada, Albuquerque, Santa Fe…..
Only a racist comment if you choose it to be. You’re right in the sense that her heritage has nothing to with it – her experience (or lack of it) does. Why would you hire a 24-year-old woman who is the daughter of a respected armorer working on her second film and not have her in control of the armory? Baldwin’s known for bulldogging those who work for him, did he just check a box as producer so he could pat himself on the back for diversity, equity, and inclusion while not letting her actually do her job?
There have been so many candidates of people totally unqualified for the positions especially judges who have no worthwhile legal knowlege. Recently, a candidate for the head of the FFA was being considered without any qualifications other than his race. DEI will cost lives but are asserting that did not happen in this case?
You are in such a hurry to be offended that you are bringing up the race and the irrelevant qualifications of the father of ‘the armorer on the set of “Rust.”’ At the same time you are ignoring the likelyhood that she was in over her head, if she was unjustly tried and convicted that give those details. I stand by my reasonable comment on the dangers of DEI should be considered in this case and never made an issue about her “heritage.” Go on record and make your statement on DEI why you seem OK with this dangerous movement and what occured on set.
Here’s a racist charge against you, all White people are NOT “Anglos.” If nothing else, try to learn how offensive your use of that term to to include all White people. I am a Celt and the “Anglos” are our traditional enemies but yet I respect the Anglo heritage and bloodlines. There are many Celts that are traced back to Spain and have been traditional friends with each other but I doubt you have any clue about that invoved history.
I understand the history of the Spanish names well enough to know that AOC has the same last name as the one that the Aborigines call “Cortez the killer.” Thanks for the tip. I understand enough about the history of the South West to appreciate the sanguinary past where Mexicans and Indians slaughtered each other including many depradations in Texas. I know enough about my family history to appreciate my GGGrrandfather’s service in the USCW battle of Val Verde NM with the 10th US Regiment, Kit Carson and local Mexican militia. I understand enough about Mexican history to appreciate Irish and Germans ex patriots and deserters from the US Army to fight with their Catholic brothers in the San Patricio Battalion (CO John Patrick Riley) in the Mexican American War.
Have you read about the history of the San Patricio Battalion and made all the connections with the USMC blood stripe, the battle of Chapultepec Castle, the etimology of the term “Gringos.’ the D branded on Riley’s face? The reason I ask is because you history lecture was very basic and just like your indignation, very lame and contrived.
dumb comment, DEI had nothing to do with this. It was a dumb armorer and a dumb actor, both of whom neglected fundamental safety rules.
Figures that you would chime in to support DEI.
Explain to me how you “figure” that I would say that? I don’t support a lot of DEI, affirmative action, etc because I consider it divisive, contrary to Dr. King’s teachings, and unfair to folks who should be judged fairly. This is not a case of DEI, it’s a case of a dumb armorer and a dumb actor. If you want to blame someone other than those directly at fault, then blame nepotism and her daddy for not teaching her right and blame the directors/producers for not ensuring a safe set.
After all the bogus responses you directed toward me and now you think I owe you an explanation on anything?
BTW, your virtue signalling on Dr. King Jr. comes up a bit short since he came from a family, like many Black Southern civil rights people, that was from a strong anti-Catholic family tradition. His “non-violence” protests are an abject failure for many generations now. The White neighborhoods he march through in Chicago have long ago become barren of Whites and riddled with crime.
Given the site isn’t offering a link to reply to your follow-up to me I’ll reply to this one. There was no virtue-signaling on my reference to Dr. King, it’s an actual view on my part. We only get past ethnicity, etc., when it’s no longer an issue which is why I don’t like DEI; it perpetuates rather than solves divisiveness. I also don’t offer bogus responses to comments. If people post asinine comments, I’m free to reply and point this out.
Don’t want folks pointing out your errors? “Do not give opinions or advice unless you are asked.” So, again, your comment on me with DEI was pretty dumb, and again, there was no DEI on this negligent discharge/homicide.
Don’t know or care what that first sentence means. List the “errors” are you rambling about now.
Here is what I posted on the thread ({[ Maybe DEI should be on trial.]}) Now you see that word MAYBE. Go get a dictionary or look up that word online. Better yet, I will even look it up for you because communicating with you is a real drag and I want to speed this along.
.
may·be
/ˈmābē/
adverb
perhaps; possibly.
a mere possibility or probability.
So I posted a fliipant statement on the possibility that DEI could have been a factor, I stand by that exact post. Here is a quote from a Newsweek article by Ryan Smith, ‘Investigator Robert Shilling said that, as a producer, Baldwin was aware that the production company behind Rust had hired Gutierrez-Reed as lead armorer, despite evidence that she was unqualified. Listed in that evidence is the claim she had “no certification or certifiable training, or union ‘card’ for this practice.”‘
So Miller, how do you know what occured in the hiring process to put an unqualified person into that cost a film crew members life?
How does your vague statement that there was a, “dumb armorer and a dumb actor” eliminante the possibilty of DEI in the hiring process?
The armorer was unqualified and the actor broke the most basic safety procedures and production team was cutting costs but none of that rules out DEI. I was NOT there when Baldwin hired the unquilified young Hannah Gutierrez-Reed and my statement reflects that circumstance. Go on record and state if you present when Baldwin made the hire? Do you have any specific quotes that support your unsubstantiared claims that DEI was NOT a factor in the hire? You stated, “dumb comment, DEI had nothing to do with this.” What proof do you have to support that definitive statement?
Also, you most recently posted, “So, again, your comment on me with DEI was pretty dumb, and again, there was no DEI on this negligent discharge/homicide.” What proof do you have to suppost another definitive statement that DEI was not a factor? Yes, you are supporting DEI but thus far have no proof to exonerate DEI. Explain?