Jeremy Renner Divorce Complaint Raises Red Flag, Restraining Order Questions

Hypocrisy much? Jeremy Renner demands a plan. (Business Insider YouTube screencap from “The Violent Film Roles Of 8 Celebrities Fighting for Gun Control.”

U.S.A. – -(Ammoland.com)- “Jeremy Renner says the novel coronavirus has landed him in an unexpected financial tight spot—and as a result, he has asked a Los Angeles judge to lower his child support payments,” The Daily Beast reports. “According to court documents obtained by TMZ and Us Weekly, the Marvel actor has asked to lower payments to his ex-wife, Sonni Pacheco, for their daughter, Ava, from $30,000 per month to something that more closely matches her ‘reasonable needs'—which he estimates amount to $11,201 per month.”

To paraphrase Bill Clinton perjuring himself in order to deny a woman claiming job-related sexual harassment her day in court, that depends upon what the meaning of the term “reasonable needs” is. Most of us manage to reasonably raise whole families and pay all living expenses and taxes on considerably less than Renner’s low-end “estimate.” Then again, we’re talking about a guy whose reported net worth is $50 million – not bad for uttering scripted and directed lines with stuntmen and CGI taking over when things get really tough.

Then again, it’s hard not to wonder if the ex-wife, whose prior claim to fame includes bit parts in B-grade movies, including portraying a character called “Splendid Wet T-Shirt Girl,” might not be calculatedly milking things for all they are worth. But that’s not a very “progressive” attitude, is it?

No, the new demand is that we #BelieveWomen. Unless you’re Hillary Clinton, and you try to discredit and disparage accusers like Paula Jones or Juanita Broaddrick using blackmail tactics and terms like “bimbo eruptions.” Or unless you’re a Joe Biden supporter, and now instead of showing the same rabid furor demanding unquestioning support for Christine Blasey Ford, you want everyone to look the other way, or to try to discredit and destroy the woman now fingering Joe Biden.

It’s instructive how many so-called Women’s March supporters, without knowing anything about the accuser other than what they’ve read from the leftwing sources they frequent, are adamantly opposed to investigating her claims and furious that it’s even being brought up. That, of course, is because they’re hypocrites.

But let’s return to Renner’s former soulmate and assume she’s really the injured party – since he’s not someone who can give Democrats more political power, it’s what we’re supposed to do, right? Her other accusations certainly should raise some eyebrows among the “commonsense gun safety” crowd.

In addition to allegations that he bit his six-year-old daughter, accusations of life-threatening conduct – with a gun – have been made:

“[N]ew court documents revealed that the model and actress is accusing Renner of threatening to kill her and himself. As detailed in the docs, Pacheco maintains that after a night of hard partying last November, including drinking and cocaine use, Renner returned home where he allegedly threatened her with a gun and put the gun in his mouth. He reportedly said at the time that he ‘could not deal with her anymore, and he just wanted to be gone.’ In another instance, Pacheco says, a nanny overheard Renner say he planned to kill her and himself because ‘it was better that Ava had no parents than to have [Pacheco] as a mother.’”

According to TMZ:

“The nanny filed a declaration in Sonni's petition, saying Jeremy told her he fired a gun into the ceiling of their house ‘because of you [the nanny]. You're the reason I pulled the trigger.  Do you think if my blood and brains are all over my bedroom floor, do you think you would be living this lifestyle in this mansion.’”

What’s left unsaid in media reports is if a restraining order has been issued demanding Renner surrender any guns he owns.

Fox News reported Pacheco “is asking the court to provide safe conditions for her and their nanny as they prepare to give depositions about the case [and] is asking the judge to set aside a room at a courthouse where she and her nanny’s deposition can take place under more secure circumstances. She notes that people can’t bring firearms or weapons into a courthouse.”

An article on “Divorce, Restraining Orders & California Gun Laws” from GunLaw.com notes:

“[R]estraining orders based on a claim of actual or threatened violence or harassment prohibit the subject individual from buying, possessing or receiving firearms. There are criminal penalties for disobeying such court orders which range up to a felony conviction with three years in state prison plus a $1,000 fine; even a misdemeanor conviction for violation of such an order can result in a ten-year prohibition against firearms ownership in California. Finally, under Federal law, if a qualified restraining order was obtained by an intimate partner, after the order is served, and while it remains in effect, the subject individual is prohibited from possessing, purchasing, or receiving firearms and ammunition. Violation of such an order is a felony punishable by up to 10 years in Federal prison and/or a $250,000 fine.”

Not that we can assume anything. Page Six reported after making her claims, Pacheco “never sought a restraining order or never withheld Mr. Renner’s 50% custody time.”

It’s not known at this writing (at least I couldn’t find anything) if such an order has been issued against Renner, but what is known is that such allegations would be more than enough for the State of California to enforce its Red Flag Law and against someone accused of doing a lot less — and not just by the spouse or partner.




So why make Renner an example? Isn’t the poor guy going through enough, particularly if it turns out the ex is not a delicate victim and brave feminist survivor of toxic masculinity, but a calculating gold-digger out to do him wrong?

Because he, with other privileged celebrities, came out in full support of the Giffords Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence/Bloomberg Mayors Against Illegal Guns agenda to “Demand a Plan.” That means he is enabling their efforts to disarm you, including their support for due process-denying, guilty until proven innocent Red Flag Laws. That’s what his overly racist Moms Demand Action and Women’s March allies want, so how could he object?

Because he's proud to “rock” with Snoop Dogg, another gun-grabber with a “gun criminal” past who settled out of court for luring underage girls with drugs and who partnered with a producer convicted of falsely imprisoning and assaulting women.

But mostly because it’s a lot more problematic for the average American to defend himself and his rights in court than it is for some virtue-signaling, anti-gun (except for the ones he owns) “lucky star” with a net worth of $50 million.


About David Codrea:David Codrea

David Codrea is the winner of multiple journalist awards for investigating/defending the RKBA and a long-time gun owner rights advocate who defiantly challenges the folly of citizen disarmament. He blogs at “The War on Guns: Notes from the Resistance,” is a regularly featured contributor to Firearms News, and posts on Twitter: @dcodrea and Facebook.

Subscribe
Notify of
52 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Kimberwarrior45
Kimberwarrior45
8 months ago

Not fully familiar with California law but with the court filing statements could not anyone claim to have the necessary information and file for the Red Flag Protection for her?

Nickname
Nickname
8 months ago

I heard it from a friend who, heard it from a friend who, heard it from another that so-n-so’s a NUT… and he’s got GUNS! Gasp!

Core
Core
8 months ago

This is an excellent example of the overreaches of constitutional authority a “Red Flag” law has over free citizens. The sad reality is people have already died and will continue to die needlessly in locales where they enforce red flag laws based on unwarranted allegations and complaints by nefarious individuals. What a shit show our Democrat leaders have landed us in.

RJL
RJL
8 months ago

The Hollywood Self Appointed Elitist’s/Authoritarian’s have their way of life because of the sacrifice of life of other Great Americans, before them… Firearms save lives. Firearms stop crime. Firearms are why America is still free. The history of freedom is inextricably tied to the development of weapons (an interesting study, by the way, if you have the time to examine it). Good people need Firearms. Efforts to end that are immoral and unjust, and when done by government, is a direct failure to “preserve, protect and defend the Constitution.” That’s a violation of the oath of office, which should lead… Read more »

Charlie Foxtrot
Charlie Foxtrot
8 months ago

It is quite ironic how many Ammoland commenters make complete fools out of themselves here. Just because someone is a Hollywood actor does not mean he isn’t on our side. Jeremy Renner IS on our side. Do your research before you spout off nonsense in the comments and show your usual ignorance to the world that surrounds you with your preconceived notions. Jeremy Renner is a gun guy! He trained at Tactical Response with James Yeager in preparation for the movie The Hurt Locker (2008) and The Bourne Legacy (2012). Yes, he participated in that 2013 ad by Illegal Mayors… Read more »

Link
Link
7 months ago

Lots of rich, powerful or famous people own guns but when they support the anti-gun people it’s a “only for me and not for the” mentality from them.
That kind of two sidedness does not help us.

Charlie Foxtrot
Charlie Foxtrot
7 months ago
Reply to  Link

Well, thank you for displaying exactly the ignorance I was talking about.

JPM
JPM
7 months ago

He’s on the video attached to this article. ‘Nuff said about whose side he’s on.

Charlie Foxtrot
Charlie Foxtrot
7 months ago
Reply to  JPM

And he is saying what exactly in that video? He is on the record on opposing gun control BEFORE and AFTER the video.

OldGuy
OldGuy
8 months ago

Those Hollywood folks have been a toxic bunch for decades already and there are no signs they plan to change their spots anytime soon. Don’t forget that after Jon Belushi’s overdose death, Robin Williams and Robert DeNiro appeared to testify before a closed session of Congress about the extent of drug abuse in the movie industry. I gather after their testimony was finished, the white wash was the same as the decades-old mantra, there is no cause for concern about drug abuse in the movie industry. In other word, while looking away from the situation, Hollywood knows how to self-restrain;… Read more »

gcm
gcm
8 months ago

, I didn’t see anything on the news about it yesterday, but I only caught bits and pieces of it in between the virus story, how bad was it?

JIAZ
JIAZ
8 months ago

The “Brilliance” of an Actor

“Dress exactly how we tell you to dress. Wear your hair and makeup exactly as we’ve told you to. Stand exactly where we tell you to stand. Do exactly what we tell you to do. Behave exactly in the way we tell you to. Now, read the words we’ve written for you, and say them exactly the way we tell you to say them. That’s it. Brilliant!”

2WarAbnVet
2WarAbnVet
8 months ago

Always remember …
“Actors are pretty stupid.” – Sir Anthony Hopkins

Carter
Carter
8 months ago

I don’t believe any of this. I don’t.
Besides, Renner uses arrows and not guns.

Carter
Carter
8 months ago
Reply to  Carter

Take a deep breath, watch a few DVD’s old timer, sorry you didn’t catch the sarcasm.
I do not believe these women.

MICHAEL J
MICHAEL J
8 months ago

Just because a celebrity endorses a cause doesn’t mean they have any credibility. Actors who have become famous for using guns and then tell the American people that they shouldn’t have them is clearly a sign of Hollywood hypocrisy. True patriots see through most of the smoke, but others who idolize these hypocrites will not.
In my opinion, people who pretend for a living should stay neutral in matters of politics because after all, their talent made them famous, not their ethics.

SEMPAI
SEMPAI
8 months ago
Reply to  MICHAEL J

J
o you mean like liam neeson or jennifer garner? Both outspoken gun haters but yet BOTH OF THEM make money from movies shooting people that have done them wrong? Hate them both refuse to even watch 1min of anything they do including commercials..

MICHAEL J
MICHAEL J
8 months ago
Reply to  SEMPAI

Exactly! The list keeps growing of the celebrities I can no longer stand to watch.

Cruiser
Cruiser
8 months ago
Reply to  MICHAEL J

My DI once told us, “He puts his pant on just like you, one leg at a time, he’s a man just like you or I.” People are just that people celebrity or not. I’ve met some pretty famous people in my time and I’ve always treated them the same as anybody else .

RoyD
RoyD
8 months ago
Reply to  Cruiser

I beg to differ; Drill Sergeant Copeland was not like a normal man. And neither were most of the other DSs in C-1-1 during the summer of 1973 at Fort Ord. Your mileage may vary.

SEMPAI
SEMPAI
8 months ago
Reply to  Cruiser

@Cruiser
your DI wasn’t a movie star making millions in the movies being a bad ass with a gun and then in real life jumping on the anti gun train so I also beg to differ with you in this instance sir.

Wild Bill
Wild Bill
8 months ago

@OV, I think that they look past their Que cards at all the eye-candy around them, but they sure don’t think past their Que cards. I find it difficult to feel sorry for them, somehow. Must be a character flaw.

TheRevelator
TheRevelator
8 months ago
Reply to  Wild Bill

@Wild Bill and

It’s not that they are ignorant or stupid…. It’s just that they believe in so much that isn’t true…

TheRevelator
TheRevelator
8 months ago
Reply to  TheRevelator


Yeah.. That’s not just limited to actors. That’s the sin of self importance that afflicts politicians, ideologs, and even occasionally normal people..

When people place themselves and their opinions as more important than truth, integrity, and duty they will always crash and burn.

Finnky
Finnky
8 months ago

@USA – Renner pushed for RFL. I think he should reap the rewards for his efforts. Make an example of him. From left’s perspective they would be demonstrating their power over gun owners and a deterrent to exercising our right of possession (ie getting guns off the street). To most it will be a visible example of how over the top our government has become and what risk these laws create for the rest of us – might even influence a few votes away from gun control advocacy. Personally if I became a prohibited person, I’d probably go to the… Read more »

Will Flatt
Will Flatt
8 months ago

It would be delicious irony if he were hoisted on his own anti-gun petard, but the truth of the matter is, when you make megabucks and you’re worth hundreds of millions of dollars, you don’t have to own your own guns, you just hire others to tote guns for you. So this won’t change his tyrannical stepper ways, and I won’t GAF what happens to him. All that I, or any other NORMAL American asks is “DONT TREAD ON ME” and keep your filthy paws off MY LIBERTY. I hope that this corona nonsense goes on long enough to kill… Read more »

JPM
JPM
8 months ago

I couldn’t care less about anything overpaid actors say or do.

StWayne
StWayne
8 months ago

TO David Codrea:

Dear Sir, as in the way that letter from 1861 was addressed,

Did you happen to read my response? I figured it might have posted too late for that, but did it anyway. I managed to add quite a bit to deciphering it. Let me know what you think. Thanks.

As for Jeremy Renner, his child support payments should be same as it is for everyone else: reasonable. End of story. This is what equal protection under the law looks like when not being cherry picked of all its low hanging “fruit.”

SGT_Wombat
SGT_Wombat
8 months ago
Reply to  StWayne

For me, it was 28% of my net income at the time of the divorce, until the kids are 18.

StWayne
StWayne
8 months ago
Reply to  SGT_Wombat

At least there’s that: 18.

CourageousLion
CourageousLion
8 months ago

Is it just me or does “Violation of such an order is a felony punishable by up to 10 years in Federal prison and/or a $250,000 fine.” seem a little bit EXCESSIVE for a “crime” where there is no victim?? Oh, and the whole pile of crap “law” is a BLATANT violation of SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED.

Cruiser
Cruiser
8 months ago

It’s pretty safe to say that everyone of those sanctimonious hypocrites in that PSA have had some kind of involvement with firearms. Whether making movies involving gun violence or simply having armed bodyguards, they are all guilty. Go pedal your shit some where else, you’re just a high paid clown here for our entertainment.

CourageousLion
CourageousLion
8 months ago

All the animals on the farm are equal. It’s just that some are more equal then others.

nobodyuknow
nobodyuknow
8 months ago

Renner may just get hoisted on his own petard. Not that it is right or constitutional but it would be poetic,

SEMPAI
SEMPAI
8 months ago

How are you ever gonna make ends meet? Wow I really feel sorry for him, red flag laws should apply to this cat as well with documented threats. And since he’s anti gun I’m sure he will understand and hand them right over or is he anti gun cause that’s what all the cool kids in Hollywood say? Hate a poser

Tionico
Tionico
8 months ago
Reply to  SEMPAI

The He said She said level of accusations noted in this piece are not sufficient to trigger RedFlagsLaws. The two females emanating their mutterings will need to put pen to paper and swear these tings are true. The fact no such order has been granted/given indicates that has not yet happened. I’m surprised the usual boilerplate restraining order complete with gun confiscation consequences has not been asked or granted by the divorce court. These fairy tale “accusations” smell to me more like the product of an over active and vengeful brain kept inside tose wet TeeShirts for which she is… Read more »

Safegunowner
Safegunowner
8 months ago

David , we need to get you out of quarantine and refreshed.
This was a rambling article..

Stone
Stone
8 months ago

I have a plan. Arm every responsible adult, have them learn, practice, be ready to assist in a time of need, and to become their own first responder. I don’t like “gun Violence” either, especially if I am forced to be one the bad end of it by politicians, ideologist or millionaires who live outside the real world most of us deal with daily. But I do feel sorry for someone, like Jeremy, who with success at his feet, makes so many poor choices.

CourageousLion
CourageousLion
8 months ago
Reply to  Stone

Gee, what you’re suggesting sounds a lot like those ignored first 13 words of the 2nd amendment! You know, the part that uses the word NECESSARY the only time in the Constitution?

Finnky
Finnky
8 months ago
Reply to  Stone

@Stone – Bless his heart.

Southern speak for – What a stupid dip shit. He’s going to have to live with the consequences of his actions.

I’m just sorry lady luck shown on someone so undeserving of the fruits of his successes.

Tionico
Tionico
8 months ago
Reply to  Finnky

Oh I dunno, sounds to me like she was doing her two bits worth to snag him. Seems HE was the money pot, and she the honey pot. Which pot is calling which pot selfish, boorish, mean, vindictive, here anyway?
The saddest part os the two kids that have to be raised by some combination of this “fine pair”. With those two for examples and role models, what hope do they have for turing into much of anything worthwhile?

Finnky
Finnky
8 months ago
Reply to  Tionico

– At that level of wealth, the nanny actually raises the kids. If parents pick a good nanny and keep them, and don’t interfere too much – the kids may yet turn out OK.

Grigori
Grigori
8 months ago

I love it when Karma bites these cruds on their butts!

TheRevelator
TheRevelator
8 months ago
Reply to  Grigori

@Grigori Karma is indeed a delicious treat…. 🙂 Just helped serve two heaping piles of it to a couple of jokers who tried to foment a lie about me. lol One went to bed angry (Needs butt salve I guess), and the other one I scared to the point he wet himself, turned and ran as fast as he could…. The second one’s comments are now for some mysterious reason no longer visible. Karma doesn’t care who you are. If someone tries to walk both sides, it comes back and bites them. Trying to fight against it only makes it… Read more »

Grigori
Grigori
8 months ago
Reply to  TheRevelator

Sounds great, Revelator!!!! Glad to see the good guys winning at last!

Take care and have a great day!

TheRevelator
TheRevelator
8 months ago
Reply to  Grigori


Yep, and thanks.. I was laughing so hard my sides still ache. Watching those two stumble over a lie and then keep digging themselves deeper and deeper until both ran away was too much.

Have a good one.. 🙂

nobodyuknow
nobodyuknow
8 months ago
Reply to  Grigori

Grigori . . . . YUP! Marry a “ho’, you gots a “ho”!

Ansel Hazen
Ansel Hazen
8 months ago

Just more of the only for me and not for thee we hear so often about. Keep em coming David.

And since we are talking about Hollyweird, how is it that shows with people competing live for some fabulous career are still on the air? American Idol, The Voice, The Masked Singer etc. Every one of these shows has a huge audience in complete violation of Kalifornias stay at home order.

Nickname
Nickname
8 months ago
Reply to  Ansel Hazen

It’s because [people] actually watch that silly crap. Can you imagine the devastation to the economy if the boneheads, oops, forgot to write [people] weren’t glued to their TVs to watch the advertising? The horror.

Heed the Call-up
Heed the Call-up
8 months ago
Reply to  Ansel Hazen

Most shows are taped months in advance.

Tionico
Tionico
8 months ago

and the times when the camera pans the fokes in the rows nobody knows WHO was really there. How do we know its not all re-chopped stock footage of “crowd scenes” from some other show, even.

Heed the Call-up
Heed the Call-up
8 months ago
Reply to  Tionico

I always found the statement “taped in front of a live studio audience” amusing. It leads one to the question have they ever filmed in front of a “dead studio audience”?