Skip to main content


Are you ready to go down the rabbit hole? To visit a surreal world, where black is white and white is carrots?

A friend, Metacognician in Shanghai, describes the situation as follows: “Life is more absurd than movies. I've gone down the rabbit hole too, when it just becomes more and more strange and you wonder how that all is supposed to make sense.” I asked him if I should just embrace it. He answered, “Why should you ... change the universe?”

It started with a psychotic named Jim Kiraly who resides, we think, at 6329 Twinberry Circle, Avila Beach, California.

Jim Kiraly is a respected citizen. A churchgoer. A Vice President of Transamerica Corporation. And a violent abuser who tried to use an emergency anti-violence measure, one intended to protect battered women, to stop his victim in a wheelchair from writing a book.

Concise enough? :)

For attorneys: Jim Kiraly filed for CLETS against his son and victim, who lived 200 miles away, did not own a car, and was in a wheelchair. His son and victim was not asked to end communications. Jim had no (zero) specific and relevant allegations that were not perjury. But he turned down repeated offers of no-contact and a signed stipulation that gave him everything but CLETS. He insisted on CLETS if his victim ever once “discussed” him with third parties.

In the end, Jim Kiraly signed an agreement far weaker than the ones he'd been offered.

A review of Court paperwork and other materials will tend to confirm that Jim and other parties, including attorneys on all sides, committed multiple felonies, crimes, and faux pas. :P

The word “abuser” is stated here publicly and without equivocation. A formal offer is hereby made to reaffirm the word in writing and under oath. Attorneys will understand the significance of the point. In short, there is little terror of a threatened defamation suit on this side. Actually, we feel that such a suit will fit nicely up Jim Kiraly's abuser ass.

Jim has one son, Ken Kiraly, who invented the Amazon Kindle and is one of the leads at Amazon's secret Lab126. Another son, Tom Kiraly is one of the leads, a Vice President-CFO type, at medical insurance firms, including one of the largest, Humana Corporation.

These people and some of the biggest names in Silicon Valley legal circles have committed or are involved in multiple crimes.

For the next decade or two, we're going to explore the crimes that these people committed, the motivations and the denial involved, the background and histories that led each person to make the choices that they did, and ways to build upon what happened and move towards positive societal goals.

There's plenty to go over. These people committed or were involved in: Spousal abuse, child abuse, DDOS (a highly prosecutable violation of CFAA), extortion, perjury, conspiracy to commit perjury (a possible felony), false police reports, conspiracy to file false police reports (a possible felony), unlawful threats, barratry, defamation, malpractice, civil harassment, criminal harassment, abuse of process, and violations of SCCBA Professional Standards.

The point was to force Jim's oldest son and victim, me, to sign a gag order. I was in a wheelchair. I'd never made a single inappropriate threat against my abuser. I wasn't even asked to not to call anybody. But Jim threatened to put me in a violence database unless I agreed never to write about him.

I won the right to write, but I lost my home of 25 years, most of my possessions, my chances for retirement, everything. Everything but a realization.

I can make a difference. I can conduct research for legitimate and reasonable purposes, document what happened, and analyze the choices of the people involved:

Maggie told me that she didn't know what she could say to me about what happened. However, we have decades to work it out. It will be productive. I'd like to direct the attention of attorneys and other parties to the:

Legitimate and Reasonable Purposes List

Questions or comments are welcome. For technical notes and disclaimers, click here.

Free Downloads

The current free ebook is located at this link:

For details about the ebook, click here.

The point? “The story is already out there, idiots. Keep it up and I'll demonstrate how something known as decentralized distribution works.”


Thursday 2012-11-08 — Hello, Michael

121108. I left the following voicemail message at Hoge Fenton. Important: This copy was transcribed partly by hand so there may be minor mistakes. However, the wording is believed to be reasonably accurate:

This message is intended for Michael but is being copied to others both as a courtesy and due to the fact there may be issues with Hoge Fenton's voicemail system. Shareholders are included as I assume on a good faith basis they may wish to know of actions by the firm or associates that may reflect on the integrity of the firm or associates.

First, I'll note that Hoge Fenton or associates issued threats recently to take actions that may be false and fraudulent and that may involve actual prosecutable crimes on the part of the firm or associates. If there is any confusion or uncertainty regarding my position on the threats by Hoge Fenton or associates, visit the website michaelbonetto dot com or natashaparrett dot com to read a statement dated circa November 5, 2012.

The purpose of the current communication, i.e., this message, is connected to the same website. Hoge Fenton or associates received or should have received a document set circa September referred to informally as release 120905. As a point of information, a new release of the document set will be posted on the website today or this week. Additionally, a few hundred family photos may be posted soon for those who are curious or interested but this is a lesser issue.

These remarks are not intended in and of themselves to constitute delivery of the document set or photos to Hoge Fenton or associates. Additionally, they do not constitute a commitment to notify the firm or associates of future releases.

As a side note, connected to lawful and appropriate steps, I'd like to refer Hoge Fenton or associates to the parts of the 120905 and current document sets that discuss research into one or more books and which, if I remember correctly, cite the simple fact that Michael and Natasha are part of the story now.

A story that connects, by the way, to events of interest to society as a whole, to issues related to abuse of different types, including abuse both of people and of the legal system, and which certainly enjoys First Amendment protections and protections of other types. In short, lawful and appropriate research is proceeding.

In closing, there is a minor technical issue. I've asked Hoge Fenton staff to comment on how cases in general that are handled by particular attorneys may be listed so that records may be lawfully and appropriately retrieved. Hoge Fenton staff has responded that senior management may be able to answer the question. I trust that the answer will be forthcoming.


Monday 2012-11-05 — Hello, Michael

121105. I left the following voicemail message at Hoge Fenton. Important: This copy was transcribed by hand so there may be minor mistakes. However, the wording is believed to be reasonably accurate:

Michael, Hello. This lawful and appropriate message is prompted by a communication I'm told you made to my attorney. It's my understanding that your missive had a threatening tone. I confess I don't follow something.

In your profession you know that the right words can be powerful. But you're also aware they aren't actually magic. Assertions must be true. So let me explain my confusion. I gather you may intend to take false and fraudulent actions, commit perjury, or engage in actual prosecutable crimes to carry out odd threats you've apparently made. What I'd like to know is this. Are you able to spell the word “barratry” ? And do you represent the polite question I've just asked you in response to an apparent threat as perjury?

By the way, it's been explained to me that you'd be uncomfortable addressing me directly due to the usual rules. From my perspective, you may have broken the usual rules already and there is a state agency I'll be discussing this with when time permits. An Executive Secretary who's above the Bar Association level. We'll see what he has to say. But you must proceed as you think best.

I'll add, though, that whatever happens in the short term, I'm doubtful that false and fraudulent actions by you will have a long term effect on your career that is entirely positive.

As a side note, I'm not presently aware that you've expressed reservations regarding the use of your name as a lawful and appropriate Internet domain. That's good. So go to and you'll be able to keep up with things. DMCA doesn't apply by the way.

Naturally I wish everything to be open and above board. So I'll add that the Natasha First Amendment research domain goes up next and of course she's invited to express any reservations.

In closing, my guess is that if you elect to proceed with false and fraudulent actions, you'll go the “frightening volume” route. That's not actually going to work. Everything I'm telling you goes online the night I state it. I'm going to initiate calls to the police, tomorrow I think, to invite them to review.


Wednesday 2012-10-31: Message for OPC

121031. I left the following voicemail message for Michael Bonetto of Hoge Fenton. Also a copy for Natasha Parrett. Parts were transcribed by hand so there may be minor mistakes but this should be reasonably accurate:

Michael, Hello. I should send a copy of this message in printed form and I may do so. But I'm exhausted tonight and I assume you won't mind a verbal version. By the way, I'm logging every syllable in my message and the content will be displayed publicly when time permits; possibly tonight. Any attempt by Natasha to misrepresent this communication as quote threatening tone unquote may lead to the two of you becoming laughing stocks in the end. I mean no offense; it's a simple fact.

First, as a polite note that doesn't need much discussion, I've taken the Internet domains listed in the 120905 document public. Presently they all go to a VPS located overseas. The owner is located in a third country and I'm thinking of hosting there as well, As far as DNS issues go see the 120905 document. By the way, there's a 75 page version planned and I assume you'll want to review it.

I trust that neither you nor your clients object to the domains as you've had nearly two months to comment. And I assume, by the way, you understand that adding a Michael Bonetto Internet domain is lawful and appropriate and that you have no objections to that.

Moving on, there's something I'm researching that I'd like to get your take on. No rush. This was sent to me tonight by somebody who works in Washington and he thought it was relevant.

Apparently the state of California has a group that investigates abuse of the CLETS process independently of the Bar Association. My contact on the East Coast says I can get somebody assigned to me personally who's not part of the system that you're familiar with and that you know how to work.

It looks to me like the document I've been sent may be more about systemic violations of standards and practices than about individual cases. But I've been told that I should talk to the Executive Secretary about the shortcuts you've taken. I wanted to see if you were able to comment on this possibility.