On-set deaths might not be a common occurrence, but they do for sure occur, and in most cases are fatal. Who could forget the 1993 accidental shooting incident that claimed the life of actor Brandon Lee, the son of the acclaimed martial artist, Bruce Lee, while he was filming the movie, The Crow? Lee died after being hit by a bullet lodged in the barrel of a prop gun that was supposed to contain just blanks. In layman’s terms, a blank is a firearm cartridge that can generate an explosive sound, similar to a regular gunshot. The firearm experiences a sort of recoil action, without the projectile from a bullet. This filmmaking technique paved the way for more and more realistic action scenes to be created. Unfortunately, this comes with some consequences.
WHAT HAPPENED?
News of the shooting on the set of the film Rust on October 21, 2021, set off a wave of speculation. As reports trickled in, the situation began to clarify: Two people had been shot during a scene at Bonanza Creek Ranch in New Mexico. One of them, director of photography Halyna Hutchins, died, while the other, director Joel Souza, was injured. Alec Baldwin, the film’s star and one of its producers, “discharged” the gun. This is what the Santa Fe County Sheriff’s Office investigation into the incident concluded as per the Deadline. On October 27, 2022, the sheriff’s office delivered its report to New Mexico’s district attorney, who worked with investigators and prosecutors to determine criminal charges. As a result, on January 19, 2023, Baldwin and armourer, a term for the person in charge of gun props, Hannah Gutierrez-Reed were each charged with involuntary. On November 11, 2022, Baldwin filed a negligence lawsuit against several crew members, alleging that they caused the tragedy. The complaint states that the actor is “seeking to clear his name,” adding that he has been fired from jobs and lost career opportunities due to the incident. But, in December 2022, Rust assistant director Dave Halls countersued Baldwin and other crew members.
As of October 22, 2021, the Court records indicate that Baldwin was told before the fatal incident that the gun had no ammunition. As per the court records, the armourer had set three guns on a cart outside of the area where the scene was being enacted. According to a search warrant application obtained by the associate producer, assistant director Dave Halls then brought one of the guns to Baldwin, not knowing that it was loaded with live rounds. A search warrant filed in a Santa Fe court noted that an assistant director said that the weapon was a “cold gun.” A cold gun (or white arm/imitation firearm) is a weapon that does not involve fire or explosions as a result from the use of gunpowder or other explosive materials.
Baldwin and Gutierrez-Reed are facing two counts of involuntary manslaughter, as announced by the New Mexico prosecutors on 19th January 2023. Under the Mexican Criminal Code, the first charge carries a maximum sentence of 18 months, while the second, which includes a firearm enhancement, would have a minimum of five years.
In a statement, Baldwin’s attorney, Luke Nikas of Quinn Emanuel claimed the “decision distorts Halyna Hutchins’ tragic death and represents a terrible miscarriage of justice” and added that “He relied on the professionals with whom he worked, who assured him the gun did not have live rounds. We will fight these charges, and we will win.”
WHAT IS INVOLUNTARY MANSLAUGHTER?
Section 304A of the Indian Penal Code 1860 deals with death caused by negligence which states that Whoever causes the death of any person by doing any rash or negligent act not amounting to culpable homicide, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to two years, or with fine, or with both. Unlike the other categories of murder, involuntary manslaughter is an unintentional killing, a killing committed with “criminal negligence” or “recklessly” — the allegation that Baldwin should have known the danger involved and that he willfully disregarded it. And seen as a continuum, it should be clear that the line between criminal liability for involuntary manslaughter and civil liability for negligence causing death begins to blur.
Section 304A of the Indian Penal Code talks about causing death by negligence or rash act. This Section mentions that if a person causes the death of another person by doing a negligent or rash act which does not amount to culpable homicide shall be punished with imprisonment for a term of a maximum of two years, or with a fine, or with both. For understanding the whole concept given in Section 304A we need to understand the term negligent act. It has now become important to have proper knowledge regarding this term. In the legal field ‘negligence’ can be defined as an act or omission that causes damages to the property of another person. Here in this Section of the Indian Penal Code, the term rash or negligent act can be defined as an act that is the immediate cause of death. There is a difference between these terms (rash and negligent) also. By ‘rash act’ we mean any act which is done restlessly. By the term ‘negligent act’ we mean a breach of duty due to omission to do something, which a reasonable man will do.
To apply Section 304A it becomes very important to show that there is no intention on the part of the defendant to commit a crime. For understanding the ‘rash act’ one should understand that it is an act which is done hastily and is opposed to any intentional act. A rash act is done without any deliberation or with caution. It depends on the level/degree of recklessness. There are four essential elements that a person has to fulfil to do a negligent act. These elements are as follows:
· Duty: For committing a negligent act, there must be some duty on the part of the defendant. Here it is important to understand whether the defendant has taken the legal duty of care towards the plaintiff.
· Breach of Duty: After fulfilling the first criteria the plaintiff must prove that the defendant has breached the legal duty imposed on him/her. It talks about the breach of duty on the part of the defendant which he/ she is expected to do as he/ she has some legal duty towards the plaintiff.
· The action of causing something: It means that the damage caused to the plaintiff is due to the act of the defendant. Here the defendant may do an act which is not expected from him/her, or the defendant may be negligent in not doing an act which was expected from him/ her.
· Damages: At last what matters is, there must be some damage/injury that is caused to the plaintiff and these damages should be the direct consequence of the defendant’s act.
IS THIS A CASE OF INVOLUNTARY MANSLAUGHTER?
Now let’s analyze these elements in the case of the Alec Baldwin shooting scenario.
Duty and Breach of duty: There was no requirement or standard that an actor independently check the gun he was given after it was declared to be “cold” by others on the set. Alec’s status as a producer on the film complicates his duties to a degree. The only definition of the term “producer” under Indian laws is found in Section 2(uu) of the Copyrights Act, 1957 which defines “producer”, in relation to a cinematograph film as a person who takes the initiative and responsibility for making the work. In Ramesh Sippy v. Shaan Ranjeet Uttamsingh & Ors. (2013), S.J. Kathawalla, J. reiterated the necessity of taking the initiative and responsibility. However, there is no clarity on what the initiative and responsibility relate to or to what extent such initiative and responsibility expands to or is applicable. Moreover, given the purpose of the Copyright Act of 1957, it is highly probable that the initiative and responsibility would relate to the creation of work and not any additional or related duties/obligations. Unless specified in any agreement wherein Alec was a party, it is not clear regarding his obligation to check the weapon, which he might have ignored, whether as an actor or producer.
In such a scenario, it may be stated that neither was there a duty nor a breach of duty by Alec given that he had no obligation to check whether he knew or even the slightest reason to check the nature of the gun.
Action and Damages: Action includes damage caused to the plaintiff due to the defendant’s act. Here the defendant may do an act which is not expected from him/her or the defendant may be negligent in not doing an act which was expected from him/ her. Well, unfortunately in the case of Alec, there was an action and damages suffered.
Given that involuntary manslaughter is the least culpable version of crimes in which death results and the fact that the application of the elements, Alec would have a good defense based on the discussion above to defend his case.
THE OBLIGATION UNDER THE INDIAN ARMS ACT OF 1959
Article 6 of the Indian Arms Act of 1959 defines an imitation firearm as an object “which has the appearance of being a firearm, whether it is capable of discharging any shot, bullet or other missile or not.” The same provision penalizes the conversion of imitation firearms into firearms capable of discharging. Now considering that the Ale had an imitation firearm, which was either replaced with an actual firearm, or the bullets therein were replaced with actual bullets, there would be a penalty as set out under Article 25 of the Indian Arms Act of 1959, which is imprisonment for a term not less than three years, but which may extend to seven years and shall also be liable to fine.
However, the Indian Arms Act of 1959 is silent as to who will the penalty be applicable. Since there are multiple parties involved here such as the vendor from where the gun is procured, the safety personnel, the prop manager at the set and the person discharging the weapon. In such a case, the liability may fall on the person where the violation (conversion of imitation firearm) begins, and it is highly unlikely that Alec Baldwin as the actor who was handed the gun by someone else would be held liable for such conversion.
LESSON LEARNED?
We can only hope that what happened on the set of Rust will be an eye-opener, and a wake-up call to prevent similar incidents from happening again. There should be no shortcuts on set, especially when firearms and other weapons are involved. These terrible accidents are unnecessary and highly preventable if only the proper safety regulations for firearms on sets are in place. Gun and weapon safety on film sets should be taken extremely seriously, with guns being shown to the crew as a whole, checked by multiple members of the crew, and kept track of by the armourer while on set.
CONCLUSION
From an Indian law perspective, Alec would have a great defense but given his status as a celebrity, and that this incident has received considerable publicity, a fair trial is harder, to be sure, especially given the media exposure that celebrity cases get in India and as such, Baldwin’s celebrity status could work in his favor or against him. Such cases will bring changes in the film industry insurance needs and more importantly will more complex indemnity clauses in the crew and artist contracts (which we’ll discuss in further blogs).
Baldwin’s legal team in February 2023 sought to disqualify special prosecutor and Republican state Representative Andrea Reeb of Clovis based on constitutional provisions that safeguard the separation of powers between distinct branches of government. Defence attorneys argued that Reeb’s role as a state lawmaker and prosecutor are incompatible and could distort legislative and judicial actions, including state spending on the prosecution of Baldwin over the 2021 shooting on the set of the Western movie “Rust.” Santa Fe District Attorney Mary Carmack-Altwies on Monday called the objection a “novel theory that has no support in New Mexico statutes or case law.” A likely preliminary hearing is still months away to decide whether evidence is sufficient to proceed to trial. Prosecutors say assistant director David Halls, who oversaw safety on set, has signed an agreement to plead guilty to the negligent use of a deadly weapon. A judge is scheduled to consider approval of the plea agreement later this month.
With the trial ongoing and new suits coming, we’ll keep updating this blog with new charges and the Indian perspective regularly.
LAWBEES 