A common statement I see in defense of Baldwin is "actors are not responsible, that's what a prop master, armorer and/or AD are for". Also, "it's the way Hollywood does it, they've always done it that way". That reminds me of the defenses of the casting couch behavior as well, but that's not what this thread is about.
Ian Hudson was an actor on Rust and on the same set. Here is what he was quoted as saying:
<Hudson says the other, more experienced actors checked their weapons 2 or 3 times after they received them from the armorer, and it didn't matter whether they were told the gun was "cold" or "hot." Baldwin did not check the weapon, but rather relied on the assistant director who assured him the gun was "cold.">
So, that contradicts the common defense that actor's do not check the condition of a firearm. I think when he said "other, more experienced actors" he means compared to himself, not the killer, but I could be wrong. Link: https://www.tmz.com/2021/10/26/rust-actor-shooting-camera-protection-alec-baldwin/
Then I came across this video of actor Jeffrey Wright. In this video he states he has never not had someone show him a gun was clear before taking possession of it. I can easily see this video being used as evidence, or Jeffrey Wright and Ian Hudson being called to the stand to refute the whole "the actor is not responsible" BS. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tkeCK13G1NM
I've also seen (didn't copy the link, but it shouldn't be too hard to find) the liability insurance policy was for "only" 6 million. And if there was a clause in the policy regarding negligence, the insurer could refuse to pay out anyway. Some media outlets are making it sound like the New Mexico DA is leaning towards bringing criminal charges against someone. Who is the big question.