Connect with us

Entertainment

Alec Baldwin and “Rust” Armorer Charged With Involuntary Manslaughter Over Death of Halyna Hutchins

Published

on

Baldwin has maintained his innocence and his lawyer says the actor will fight the charges. 


Charges Announced

Prosecutors in New Mexico announced on Thursday that actor Alec Baldwin will be charged with involuntary manslaughter over the 2021 fatal shooting of “Rust” cinematographer Halyna Hutchins. 

The film’s armorer, Hannah Gutierrez-Reed, will also be charged with involuntary manslaughter. 

The cast and crew of “Rust” were rehearsing a scene that involved Baldwin, who was both a producer and actor in the movie, pointing a gun toward the camera. The weapon fired, killing Hutchins and injuring the director, Joel Souza.

Baldwin has long maintained that he was told the gun was safe to use and did not have live rounds. He also claimed that he did not pull the trigger, but the FBI refuted that possibility and said the gun could not have gone off without pulling the trigger. 

“Rust” Assistant Director David Halls, who handed Baldwin the gun and told him it did not have live rounds, signed a plea agreement for negligent use of a deadly weapon. According to a release from New Mexico First Judicial District Attorney Mary Carmack-Altwies, the terms include a suspended sentence and six months of probation.

“After a thorough review of the evidence and the laws of the state of New Mexico, I have determined that there is sufficient evidence to file criminal charges against Alec Baldwin and other members of the ‘Rust’ film crew,” Carmack-Altwies said in a press release posted to social media. “On my watch, no one is above the law, and everyone deserves justice.”

According to that release, Baldwin and Gutierrez Reed will be charged in the alternative on two counts of involuntary manslaughter, meaning a jury would not just decide if they are guilty or not, but what definition of involuntary manslaughter they would be guilty under. 

For the first charge to be proved, “there must be underlying negligence.” It would be punishable by 18 months in jail and a $5,000 fine. The release said it includes “the misdemeanor charge of the negligent use of a firearm, which would likely merge as a matter of law.”

The second charge is  involuntary manslaughter in the commission of a lawful act, and “requires proof that there was more than simple negligence involved in a death.” It is also punishable by 18 months in jail and up to a $5,000 fine, but it includes a firearm enhancement, which makes the crime punishable by a mandatory five years in jail. 

Responses From The Accused

If any one of these three people—Alec Baldwin, Hannah Gutierrez-Reed or David Halls—had done their job, Halyna Hutchins would be alive today,” special prosecutor Andrea Reeb said in a statement. “It’s that simple. The evidence clearly shows a pattern of criminal disregard for safety on the ‘Rust’ film set.”

Charges have not yet been formally filed but will be by the end of the month. 

In a statement to the press, Baldwin’s lawyer Luke Nikas called the prosecutors’ decision “a terrible miscarriage of justice,” that “distorts” Hutchins’ death.

“Mr. Baldwin had no reason to believe there was a live bullet in the gun — or anywhere on the movie set,” Nikas said. “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.”

Jason Bowles and Todd J. Bullion, attorneys for Gutierrez-Reed, called the charges “the result of a very flawed investigation, and an inaccurate understanding of the full facts.” 

Hutchins’ family, however, thanked the officials for conducting an investigation and said their own independent inquiry likewise found charges were warranted. 

“It is a comfort to the family that, in New Mexico, no one is above the law,” a statement from their attorney said. “We support the charges, will fully cooperate with this prosecution, and fervently hope the justice system works to protect the public and hold accountable those who break the law.”

See what others are saying: (NPR) (Variety) (The Los Angeles Times)

Entertainment

QTCinderalla Vows to Sue Deepfake Website: “Constant Objectification” is “Exhausting”

Published

on

The streamer said that anyone who chooses to view nonconsensual deepfake porn is “the problem.”


QTCinderella Plans Legal Action

Twitch streamer QTCinderalla said during a Monday stream that she is going to sue the maker of a website that hosts explicit deepfake images of herself and other content creators. 

“I promise you, with every part of my fucking soul, I am going to sue you,” QTCinderella, whose real name is Blaire, said through tears. 

Blaire went live after fellow streamer Atrioc accidentally revealed on Twitch that he had an open tab to a website that hosts deepfake porn. Graphic images of high-profile female streamers were visible his browser, and the website also includes deepfakes of more creators, including Blaire. 

Atrioc apologized for accessing deepfake images on a website that promotes explicit content of his female streaming colleagues. He claimed that he got “morbidly curious” and “clicked something” after falling down an artificial intelligence rabbit hole online. 

“It’s gross,” he said. “It’s gross and I’m sorry.” 

In the past, Blaire has talked about having to pay services thousands of dollars to remove graphic deepfake content that has been posted without her consent. Despite those efforts, it is an issue she still has to deal with on a regular basis. 

“Fuck the fucking Internet,” she said during her Monday stream. “Fuck the constant objectification and exploitation of women, it’s exhausting.”

“Fuck Atrioc for showing it to thousands of people,” she continued. “Fuck the people DMing me pictures of myself from that website.” 

The Objectification of Female Streamers

Blaire said that it “should not be a part of [her] job” to constantly fight for this content to be removed from the Internet, nor should it be her job to deal with the onslaught of harassment that comes with the dissemination of these fabricated images. 

“If you are able to look at women who are not selling themselves or benefiting off of being seen sexually — they’re not benefiting, they’re not selling it, they’re not platforming it themselves — if you are able to look at that, you are the problem,” she said. “You see women as an object.” 

On Twitter, she explained that the repercussions of these deepfakes go far beyond exploitation and violation. 

“The amount of body dysmorphia I’ve experienced since seeing those photos has ruined me,” she said. 

She was far from the only person to call out how invasive it is to post or consume deepfake content of people who did not consent to being depicted in a sexual manner. 

“Stop sexualizing people without their consent,” Pokimane, who is also among the female streamers featured on the site, said. “That’s it, that’s the tweet.”

No one should have themselves be put on a deepfake porn website w/o their consent and it’s fucking disgusting at the men who are making light of this shit. fucking despicable,” another person wrote.

See what others are saying: (Dexerto) (Metro) (The Gamer)

Continue Reading

Entertainment

Britney Spears Asks For Privacy After Fans Called Cops to Conduct a Wellness Check on Her

Published

on

Fans said they were concerned after the singer deleted her Instagram account.

EDITOR’S NOTE: This article was updated to include a statement from Britney Spears


Fans Call 911

Britney Spears said her fans “went a little too far” after some called the police to conduct a wellness check on her. 

The fans, many fueled by online conspiracy theories, were concerned about Spears because she deleted her Instagram account. While this is something the singer has done multiple times in the past, her fans thought she had left secret signals in her last post suggesting she needed help.

Some even posted videos of them calling emergency services on TikTok, a platform that is full of conspiracy videos about Spears. 

“I love and adore my fans but this time things went a little too far and my privacy was invaded,” Spears wrote in a statement on Thursday, citing “prank phone calls” that were made to police.

According to Spears, officers did not enter her home because once they got to her gate, they “quickly realized there was no issue and left immediately.”

“This felt like I was being gaslit and bullied once the incident made it to the news and being portrayed once again in a poor and unfair light by the media,” Spears continued. “During this time in my life, I truly hope the public and my fans who I care so much about can respect my privacy moving forward.”

On Wednesday, a spokesperson for Ventura County Sheriff’s Office confirmed to Page Six that the department “did get calls into our dispatch” but added there was no reason to believe that Spears was “in any kind of harm or any kind of danger.”

That spokesperson declined to say if officials contacted Spears or conducted a wellness check, citing privacy and public trust issues.

The Prominence of Britney Spears Conspiracies 

Just over a year has passed since Spears was freed from a highly restrictive conservatorship that controlled her life and finances for 13 years. Throughout the conservatorship, fans tried to use the pop icon’s social media to pick up clues that she was secretly struggling. She did not publicly speak about the conservatorship until the summer of 2021. 

Now that she has her freedom, fans are still reading heavily into her posts. Some believe there are hidden messages in her captions and in the gestures she does while dancing. Others think she is dead, missing, or hiding and that a body double is being used in her posts. Some are so concerned that they are coordinating a mass effort to pressure the Los Angeles Times into investigating Spears’ whereabouts and safety. 

In the last several years, many have reflected on Spears’ early days in the spotlight and the cruel ways she was harassed and targeted by paparazzi, news outlets, and culture at large. Often the punchline to a joke throughout the 2000s, many now sympathize with Spears, who was forced to endure heavy public scrutiny at a young age. Documentaries like “Framing Britney Spears” prompted many to see Spears as a victim of abusive media tactics, not the “crazy” woman tabloids painted her to be. 

Many are now concerned that fans are only going to subject Spears to a new onslaught of harassment by calling the police to her house. Even if the conspiracy theories are technically well-intentioned and often come from a place of concern, some believe they will jumpstart a media frenzy that could harm Spears’ mental well-being.

See what others are saying: (Page Six) (Jezebel) (TMZ)

Continue Reading

Entertainment

Razzies Apologize For Nominating 12-Year-Old, Adopt Age Rules For Future Nominations

Published

on

The group’s founder said the Razzies regret “any hurt” the young actress may have “experienced as a result of our choices.”


Razzies Face Backlash

The Razzie Awards revoked its “insensitive” nomination of 12-year-old Ryan Kiera Armstrong and added new guidelines banning child performers from being nominated in the future. 

The Razzies, which award the year’s worst movies, included Armstrong in its “Worst Actress” lineup for her role in “Firestarter.” Bryce Dallas Howard, Diane Keaton, Kaya Scodelario, and Alicia Silverstone were also nominated in the category.

Armstrong starred alongside Zac Efron in “Firestarter,” an adaptation of Stephen King’s novel of the same name. The picture received a 10% rating from critics on Rotten Tomatoes. 

While the film was broadly panned, many thought it was a bridge too far to nominate a child for a bad acting award.

“The Razzies are already mean-spirited & classless, but to nominate a kid is just repulsive & wrong,” child star Julian Hilliard, best known for his work in “WandaVision,” tweeted. “Why put a kid at risk of increased bullying or worse? Be better.”

Actor and podcast host Brandon Hardesty said the nomination was “completely ignorant and cynical.”

“They have no clue what this can do to a child actress who probably considered her starring role in FIRESTARTER as a high point in her life,” he wrote. 

“That girl was the best part of that mess of a movie,” film critic Shannon McGrew tweeted. “And on top of that, no kid should ever be nominated for an award that punches down on them.”

Nomination Revoked

Razzies founder John Wilson addressed the backlash in a statement to the press on Wednesday, calling the criticism “valid.”

“Sometimes, you do things without thinking, Then you are called out for it. Then you get it,” Wilson said. “It’s why the Razzies were created in the first place.”

“We have removed Armstrong’s name from the Final Ballot that our members will cast next month,” he continued. “We also believe a public apology is owed Ms. Armstrong, and wish to say we regret any hurt she experienced as a result of our choices.”

In addition to removing Armstrong’s nomination, The Razzies is now adopting “a Voting Guideline precluding any performer or film-maker under 18 years of age from being considered” for awards. 

“Since our motto is ‘Own Your Bad,’ we realize that we ourselves must also live up to it,” the statement closed.

While Armstrong will be the last child to nab a Razzie nomination, she was far from the first. Jake Lloyd made the list for his turn as young Anakin Skywalker in “Star Wars: Episode I – The Phantom Menace.” Gary Coleman and Macaulay Culkin also got nominations as teenagers.

See what others are saying: (Deadline) (The Hollywood Reporter) (People)

Continue Reading