This is an excellent explanation of the gun in question. I knew from the beginning that it was premeditated murder. Possible motive: He was self financing the movie. Things were not going well (reported). I think the director was encouraging everyone to walk away until things were fixed. Would have lost a major chunk of his net worth (house as collateral?) The next question is: Were there accomplices.
I heard that this could have literally just been a fit of rage which he has been known for. He's "in" Hollywood he could literally have just loaded a firearm and shot her in cold blood because they can just get away with it. Would explain why his excuses don't make sense.
Or this is literally some Agent 47 hitman shit where someone put a live round in a gun, or purposefully put a squib load in the barrel so a blank would send the blocked projectile out. None of this makes sense so I wouldn't put it past him to literally have shot her on purpose at this point, add in your speculation thats just another reason why someone would shoot someone.
He pointed the gun at her in a fit of anger and pulled the trigger. Not murder since he didn't intend to kill her, but it is starting to look like manslaughter. Prosecutors could even charge him with felony murder if they have the chutzpah.
(post is archived)