Sherrifs speak on "Pulp Fiction" screenwriter's jailhouse tweets

"He really messed up. He could have done nine months out of a year sentence, and not even in lock up for killing someone. Now he is going to do the remainder of that time in county jail." Ventura County Sheriff's spokesman Ross Bonfiglio on the matter of Roger Avary's jailhouse tweets, previously blogged on BB first here and later here.


  1. The basic issue is likely the fact that one of the rights you lose while incarcerated is the right to have unmonitored/uncontrolled communication with the outside world.

  2. “Inmates who have a job and haven’t been convicted of a violent offense are generally eligible for the program if they face more than 30 days in jail, both attorneys said.”

    i love how drunken driving and killing someone while under the influence presented in this case as non-violent act, by *both* attorneys. driving is a violent act when sober. cars are deadly weapons. add booze to the mix and you’ve got an accident waiting to happen.

  3. yeah. drinking too much and taking a turn to fast and killing a friend on accident is totally like knifing somebody.

    Also, Antinous, care to cite how you know he’s making things up?

    1. Only if you weren’t intending to kill the person when you ‘knifed’ them.

      I’m sure endangering peoples lives is quite different if you don’t MEAN to endanger their lives… but of course, any sane person who gets behind the wheel of a car drunk must know they are endangering lives so…

      Yeah, stabbing someone is quite like putting your out of control self in control of 2 tons of hutling death.

      So long as you didn’t mean to be responsible for the consequences of your actions.


  4. Come ON people, he KILLED a woman! As a result of his decisions and actions, she is DEAD. gone to meet her maker! Pushing up daisies! Gone to join the choir invisible! This prison thing is supposed to be a punishment, not a publicity event. He had an opportunity at an extremely light sentence. One year in a furlough? Either Cali is extremely lax (hah!) or being a hollywood bigshot got him special consideration. Other states would give you 2-10 in a real jail.

    This isn’t about free speech, he’s not being abused. He’s being treated leniently and had privileges that most prisoners would never be allowed. He took it too far, treated it too lightly, and now he gets the same as most. He can write letters to his publicist, and have the jail staff read all his communications.

  5. It doesn’t matter whether he’s making it up or not. Giving him more jail time because he tweeted is tantamount to putting him in jail specifically because he tweeted.

    Unless there was some specific provision of his program that didn’t permit free communication like that, some specific rule that he broke, but I doubt that was the case. This is just “you did something that, in retrospect, we wish we hadn’t let you done. So now you’re going to jail”

    1. I agree with Fang – the question is Daemon correct? The article does not state what the sheriff’s basis was for terminating Avary’s furlough other than “security issues”, a very nebulous statement. Does the sheriff have the right/ability to revoke the work furlough program without review?

      Lastly, Mr. Lief states “It’s interesting that Mr. Avary could not do what was required of him to stay out of trouble and stay out of county jail.” That implies a specific violation of the conditions for his furlough – once again, without details. I believe we should be able to find out what that violation was.

  6. @1
    US Constitution
    Amendment XIII
    Section 1.

    Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.

    Ergo, if you have been convicted of a crime, you can be enslaved, and so your rights may be curtailed pretty much to any degree the state desires.

  7. Yup. Bad judgment is totally the same as malicious harmful intent.

    Yes, endangering people’s lives unintentionally is completely different than trying to kill someone on purpose. The law even sees it that way!
    That’s why we have a thing called murder, and one called manslaughter, and another called involuntary manslaughter. Funny, that.

    I think it’s great how everyone feels totally free to rain judgment down on the guy. Seems to me that if you had done something stupid and killed a friend and nearly killed your wife, and then admitted your guilt and were being punished for it, you’d really need the rest of the world to beat up on you, for being a murderous, disgusting person.

    Because, you know, being responsible for accidentally killing someone you care and hurting others about isn’t enough baggage.

    For the home of “Happy Mutants”, BoingBoing sure attracts a vicious crowd.

Comments are closed.