Friday, December 10, 2021

Facts & Evidence v. Bile & Animus

Look, if you're not going to bother to note the obvious, just have a hissy fit, own it as such, and get it out of your system.

Nobody, least of all me, has gone any sort of "teary-eyed" over Baldwin. I was damn near, if not the, first one to meme-tag him online for the shooting. He's the same insufferable jackass he's always been. The problem for some of you is that he's a legally innocent jackass, in this case.

Pisser. I get it. Content yourself with his karma, and that being such an egregious jackass, he's going to jump on his tiny wedding tackle again (and again), with cleats on, until the day he dies. We will see no end to our epicaricacy over that, each and every time, and even long after he shuffles off his mortal coil and becomes a Good Progtard.

But if you're going to go full-on tetanus-rabid, go the rest of the way, and just say "To Hell with the law, fuck law itself, because laws are for other people!" and then own that.

Another actor, the great Paul Scofield, has a few words to you on that score:

Baldwin was a producer on the flick, not the producer. There were, according to varying reports, 6 to 12 such persons.

He was gifted with that credit in return for writing the story. He wasn't the line producer, or the supervising producer, and thus had no - none, zero, nada, zip,  bupkus - hiring/firing authority on that movie, which pretty well craps all over the whole narrative to the contrary. The LLC for the whole bunch will eat the liability shield, and that will be that, and that pisses some people off.

He's innocent of negligence because he was doing his job, as directed by one of the victims, when the incident occurred, while both the armorer/weapons handler, and the person designated on that production to double check her, failed in every single respect to do theirs.

So, maybe not being the insurance adjuster trying to
prosecute Flounder for auto theft might be a better move...

Had they shown the circumspection of a true professional propmaster/armorer outlined in comments at the OP by pkoning, you wouldn't have the long-past-dead carcass of this horse to beat, but it wasn't a Robin Williams movie with a real budget, it was a low-budget p.o.s., and they took who they could get for the wages they were paying. In this case, a criminally inept and wholly ignorant second-time armorer (Gutierrez-Reed) trying lamely to follow in daddy's footsteps, without the first shred of knowledge or capability to do so, let alone time in actual occupational apprenticeship, necessary for the job. And she got two people shot, and one killed. Max her out for that. She bears the entire responsibility for the incident. If it's shared at all, it's to a small but significant degree, by the assclown 2d AD (Halls) who had no business being a prop assistant for weapons safety, but nonetheless was, and screwed that pooch as well.  If you take one or both of them out of the equation, and replace them with competent people, the incident never happens. Baldwin, OTOH, no matter how much vinegar it pours in your mouths to say it, could have been replaced with any 50,000 other members of SAG, doing the exact same thing, and it would have made no difference to the death toll on the day. Only to the degree of frothing rabidity of the subsequent reactions. And that's the rub, isn't it?

That it was Baldwin, Satan's Own Spokeshole, and that despite holding the gun in his very hand, that the entire blame can be seamlessly and correctly laid at someone else's feet, exactly as justice demands, is what so upsets your fondest hopes and wishes.

Well, boo effing hoo. As an excellent lawyer once pointed out in a similar case:

"Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passion, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence."

So all I've got is Thomas More and John Adams on my side of the argument, and you've got your spleen, digestive juices, and endocrine system. I like my odds.

You can huff and puff about that, and gainsay that no end with apples-and-oranges fallacious logic, but you can't disprove it, no matter how long you hold your breath, how blue you turn, and how long and hard you jam your fingers in your ears and shout "La! La! La! I'm not listening!"

Do that all you like, because it means nothing in the grand scheme, except to expose what you're using in substitute for facts and logic. You won't be argued out of your faulty position that Baldwin is a negligent criminal, because you didn't use facts and logic to get you there. You used only bile and animus, which is the difference between a legal system that has stood the test of time for over 900 years, and a simple rabid mob.

Be careful what you wish to use for your standards, because you'll get your wish.

And rue the day.

First they came for the actors,...

The D.A. in this hugely meaningless case will do what she will do. Your only hope lies in hoping that twelve people too stupid to avoid jury duty will share your animus for Baldwin, rather than my love for the standard of law and justice. It may yet happen, but I wouldn't get my hopes up.

Ignoring entirely how wrong those frothing for Baldwin's punishment are, or how right the argument for his acquittal will be, considering how little this case means in the grand scheme, including doing nothing whatsoever to break your legs nor pick your pockets, let alone bring back the dead nor recall the bullet fired, the amount of dyspepsia some people are investing in this, only to endure a steady diet of vinegar, is quite simply fascinating, in a watching-a-train-wreck sort of way. You decry Rittenhouse forced to legally fight for his life, but in the same breath want to visit the same thing on our juiciest enemies, which is to at once condone both cases. You can't have it both ways, and you won't, but you can have nothing that you want in both cases (which is the likeliest outcome, because the D.A. isn't a frothing lunatic), and be forced to eat the whole party-sub 20-foot-long sh*t sandwich you'll get served.

Why not, instead, learn the only wisdom that comes of beating your head against a brick wall:

And let's be serious here. It's one thing to get all raw and butthurt because injustice is being done to someone. But it's seventeen kinds of asinine jackassical to get all twisted into a pretzel because it's not, and to be out at the barricades, shouting for the blood of an innocent person.

Especially when there's a bit of history involved with being on the wrong side of a trial.

Suck it up, buttercup, and move on to more important things.
Compared to this incident, that would be...anything else.


BigCountryExpat said...

Bro, much love, you know that, but man, lets just leave Ballesswin in the gutter where he and all the -other- Hollyweird Trash belong... you got great observations... and a flair for insults that -almost- is as good as mine, however, dude... as you meme'd and Gran #1 always sings, "Let it Go"... yer better than that.

Now, since this is done Gyrene, put down the crayola (I know it's a bitch) and get back out there and get back to it beating and flogging the Glorious and Harmonious P&PBUH (Plus 10%) Orifice of The (p)Resident, The Dementor-in-Chief, Emperor Poopypants the First, Chief Executive of the Kidsmeller Pursuivant, Good Ole Slo Xi-Den.


Aesop said...

The memes have to work at the level of understanding of the people they're aimed at.
Bad woke Disney cartoons are their level, AFAIK.

Poopypants, short of unbelievable circumstance, is simply a clowncarnucopia of Fail, every waking moment.
I hardly bother with him any more, unless he sets new records in dementia.

You can't help a country when 51% of them enjoy the feel of steaming hot urine shampoo, and a good shit sandwich, and then ask for seconds.

1chota said...

Well, I unnerstan BCE, but I thought you said it well.
But tomorrow is another day.
Sic 'em.

Anonymous said...

“You can't help a country when 51% of them enjoy the feel of steaming hot urine shampoo, and a good shit sandwich, and then ask for seconds.“. Quote of the fucking century right there.

Mike-SMO said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Aesop said...

@Mike SMO,

I blasted your comments into the ether, because there was no way to reply to them without ingraciously jumping up and down on your head.

I suggest before you attempt to re-post on this topic, you go back to this blog on the day after the incident (late October), and read the ten or so posts wherein we detailed every facet of the case that's come to light, and with which you are evidently wholly unfamiliar.

[Pro Tip: Not relying on hearsay horseshit rumors that disappeared from all official sources and mainstream news within hours of the incident because they were completely disproven by sworn affidavits from everyone present on the production and released publicly would be a spectacularly bright first step, before taking another whack at this topic. So would gaining some familiarity with the facts and details of the production on the day, basic production operations, and the specific safety rules and regs for weapons and ammunition codified and followed religiously on every American production for decades, until PropTwat on this p.o.s. decided they were optional, would also do you a world of good.]

Then see if you still want to try again, if you can.

Anonymous said...

On the surface and per existing set laws you've noted, everything is spot on. It feels like there are connections all over. Wondering, is it a coincidence that the shooting of the implicated Clinton lawyer's wife was done by a person named in the Epstein log? Is it a coincidence that Trump gets covid and flips to start selling pharmaceuticals right after as his name became part of the Epstein case? They got John Roberts on it too around the same time. Let's watch what other notable pawns in this power game who do something so polar opposite to their character that just happens to coincidentally be tied to the timing of their names being leaked in connection with the Epstein log and purported video vault. If they do what the power wants, then their Epstein experience and any mention of that relationship seems to be temporarily muted. Strange how that works.

Wayne said...

Hmmm, Attorney Andrew Branca, who literally wrote the book on the Law of Self Defense,


Aesop, an ER nurse who attests to having worked in Hollywood.

I'm gonna go with Mr. Branca on this one.

P.S. Even if you give Alec Baldwin, the actor, a pass, Alec Baldwin, the producer, fries.

Aesop said...


Lawyer J. Noble Daggett's manifest failures of comprehension in this case were detailed on this blog a month and more past. But adherence to the ramblings of someone so manifestly ignorant on the topic explains your own errors.

He should stick to self-defense law, which has absolutely nothing to do with this incident,
and where he has acknowledged expertise, and stay out of worklace injury tort and liability law, where he has about as much as any other chattering monkey.

And Baldwin, one of multiple producers in an LLC or between 8 and 12 such (depending on which account one reads), walks away from this essentially scot-free. He neither hired nor fired anyone, nor had any such responsibilities, making him a simple partner in a corporation with no assets but a mediocre script, and a partially-finished movie, i.e. zip and squat. There will be corporate liability insurance, which will provide 100% of the available funds for payout. That's how Hollywood has worked for literally decades and decades.

Yet another key fact about productions of which you, like so many others, are wholly ignorant.

Maintain whatever fairytales help you sleep at night. But don't piss and moan when the Easter Bunny doesn't leave you any eggs after all is said and done. There is how you imagine the world works, and how it actually works. The farther apart those two things are, the greater your daily consternation will be when imagination meets reality like hitting a brick wall.