To the editor: A New Mexico jury found “Rust” gunsmith Hannah Gutierrez-Reed guilty of involuntary manslaughter on the set of the film's cinematographer. The guilty verdict against her is, in my opinion as a retired attorney, the best thing that could have happened to Alec Baldwin, who has also been charged with involuntary manslaughter. (“What does the criminal conviction of gunsmith 'Rust' mean for the Alec Baldwin case?” March 7)
If the gunsmith was criminally negligent and gave Baldwin a gun that had live ammunition, then how could he be held liable? Under common industry practice, he had the right to trust that the gunsmith believed the gun was harmless.
The question of whether he pulled the trigger or cocked the gun and it accidentally discharged is irrelevant since, either way, an unloaded gun would not have caused any damage.
A jury should have no problem acquitting Baldwin, as another person who worked on the set of “Rust” has already been found guilty of causing the tragedy.
Barry Rubin, Beverly Hills
..
To the editor: It is more than disingenuous to suggest that Baldwin's criminal liability depends on claiming special rights as an “actor” or perhaps because it is more difficult to convict a star than an unknown film industry worker.
It is not the actor's job to recheck an object given to him, and rechecking each object could even be dangerous.
As a simple analogy, police officers are sometimes accused of using a gun when it would have been appropriate to use a Taser. Different laws apply, but police officers would never be criminally charged or even reprimanded for using a Taser that malfunctioned or somehow overcharged and became lethal. It's not even remotely an expectation in your job description.
So it's no surprise that SAG-AFTRA supports Baldwin and, by extension, everyone else who may find themselves in a similar situation.
Les Hall, Santa Ana
