how a single action revolver works before or after some unspecified modifications?

If you have some additional information, please share!

If it's a "single action" revolver, the hammer MUST be manually set back by hand...

Changes to the trigger will have ZERO effect on this fact...

Now, it the revolver was a "double action", that would require more than just "some trigger modifications"...

Can a Gun Discharge without Pulling the Trigger?

Think he/she knows of what she/he writes.

Exactly

I smell a white envelope full of money! That Prosecutor needs to be investigated by the FBI….

how did a live bullet get in the gun?

Overblown
 

I worked in the business for 35 years and during that time there were many sets that had firearms. I don't know if the trigger was pulled or not and even if that is the important issue. The full responsibility is on the person who in charge with handling these guns. On the sets I worked on the prop master, or his assistant would show up on the set just before they were ready to shoot, show the talent that the gun was empty and wait around until they were finished and collect it. The mere fact that any other than the armorer had access put the blame squarely on them. There was another question where the gun was aimed. I wasn't there but in most cases it's the director or the cinematographer who will direct the actor on everything to achieve the shot they're looking for. I was on a dark roof top one night where a crew member fell down a five-story building airshaft, we broke for lunch as the fire department got him out and when right back up to finish the shot under the same conditions. The bottom line even though someone died on this shoot, this whole thing was overblown since a star was involved. Movie sets can be dangerous places to work, long hours, fast pace, and young crews, what could possibly go wrong.

Justice is whatever they decide it is.
 

as jack once said, " you ( we) can't handle the truth".

There is still the question of why there was a live round in the firearm and why there was live ammunition on the set in the first place. The media loves to speculate. Readers should discount every article that uses the words, possible, may have, could have, might be, conceivable, hypothetical, feasible, etc. and stick to the known facts.

No, he is still guilty.
 

Each and every person who touches the gun is responsible to check if a gun is loaded. For instance as soon as person A takes the gun from where it was sitting or being stored, Person A checks the gun, Now person A hands the gun to person B and just before the hand off, Person A rechecks the gun in view of person B, who takes the gun and checks it again. ETC right up to the very last person to get the gun, and while the gun is with the last person, any time this person might set the gun aside for a while, they need to check it again, and then when returning the gun back to it’s storage location, and again recheck the gun before giving it to the armorer, who again checks the gun before storing the gun. The long and short of it, it takes mere seconds to visually inspect a gun to ensure it is empty, and it should never be assumed to be empty until you visually inspect the gun yourself. As far as Mr. Baldwin is concerned, he was the last person receiving the gun, it is his responsibility to check the gun that ended up killing and injuring those two people. The fatal discharge falls firmly in Mr. Baldwin’s lap and nobody else’s.

Expensive
 

Unfortunately you would have been in jail (after being processed), (Baldwin may have gotten preferential treatment), wrongfully, and had the expense of a lawyer and bail. Perhaps have been fired from your job and have the suspicion of some neighbors. Maybe your child would be excluded from events, etc. This whole thing was mishandled.

And how does live ammunition get on any movie site,,,

He still had some responsibility. First, it is ALWAYS the responsibility of a person holding a gun to know if it's loaded. That responsibility cannot be farmed out to another party. Second, guns should never be pointed at someone else unless you intend to fire at them.

I'd would not trust either.. (cnn or fbi)

I would trust neither !