The current free ebook is located at this link:
http://haggishell.com/ridgeproject.pdf

For details about the ebook, click here.

121206. Here's something you won't see in the U.S.: a group of Capybaras grazing in a residential neighborhood. This photo is posted with permission.

121206. Discussion with Prasanga. Posted with permission.

<Prasanga> oldcoder still my exam is going on today i have Data structure and algorithms
<OldCoder> Are you prepared?
<Prasanga> its hard to me that subject oldcoder but i still reading

<Prasanga> oldcoder yesterday i made small android application and i installed it on to my phone. now i debugging using my phone not simulator.
<OldCoder> All right

<Prasanga> oldcoder yes this 11th exam will over
<Prasanga> i am moving to reading again i have few hours
<OldCoder> You are prepared. Prepared is the best luck.
<Prasanga> yes oldcoder
<OldCoder> I feel you'll be successful in life
<OldCoder> You are creative and sensible

<Prasanga> Thats strength for me oldcoder
<Prasanga> thats word right oldcoder ima sensitive but i dont like to be like that
<OldCoder> Be like what? Sensitive?
<Prasanga> yes
<OldCoder> It is good to be that way

It makes you real
If you feel
That is the deal
Feel and be real

<Prasanga> yes oldcoder but i read about clothing advertising. they published “Fantasy is better than reality” ... but i am not agree with that
<OldCoder> What do you believe?

<Prasanga> i believe reality. fantasy is not real... using fantasy we cover our reality... but one day world will reveal our reality... then fantasy go away
<OldCoder> Yes
<OldCoder> This is true. Fantasy is about philosophy. A way to see things. Not to replace what is there.

121206. Recent Minetest changes. Just two minor items:

1. Added Trashcan by Baby Face
2. Updated Octutool by Octupus

121206. Slept 11:45pm Wednesday to 8:30am Thursday. Sleep seems more normal recently.

121205. Michael Bonetto of Hoge Fenton made the following statement yesterday in mail to my attorney:

This is intended as a confidential settlement communication and is not to be republished by any individual in any manner. This is also a protected settlement offer per Evidence Code Section 1152.

Michael included a revised settlement offer with his letter. The text quoted above was apparently intended to suggest that I'd be breaking the law if I posted the new document publicly. However, it appears that Michael may have misrepresented the role that Evidence Code Section 1152 plays in this type of situation.

Here's an excerpt from an article on the subject. The article ran in the Daily Journal and the use of an excerpt here is believed to fall under Fair Use guidelines.

If I understand the following text correctly, I may be able to treat threats that Michael Bonetto makes in connection with Sections 1152 and 1154, should he choose to do so, as barratry. Not sure about this yet. Remarks by observers are welcome.

Lawyers routinely send and receive settlement communications marked “Privileged and Confidential Pursuant to California Evidence Code Sections 1152 and 1154.” They take solace in the quoted language, certain that what lawyers say in settlement discussions cannot be discovered later on in the litigation or in another case.

But in fact the two sections cited do not make anything privileged or confidential. They simply make settlement communications inadmissible to prove or dispute liability for the claim being negotiated. Settlement communications are often discoverable and admitted into evidence for purposes other than to buttress or attack liability for a given claim.

California Evidence Code section 1152(a) provides in general that evidence of settlement discussions cannot be admitted to prove liability. Its lesser-known counterpart, Evidence Code section 1154, focuses on offers by plaintiffs, and it states that an offer to discount a claim is inadmissible to prove the invalidity of the claim or any part of it.

Each of these sections covers more than the actual settlement offer, protecting “any conduct or statements made in negotiation” of a settlement. Both sections are designed to encourage open and forthright settlement discussions free of the fear that something said during negotiations might later be used to show the weakness of a party's case, or worse — be construed as an admission of liability.

In addition, a statement made in a settlement discussion cannot be admitted into evidence on the ground that it is contrary to testimony the witness will offer at trial.

These code sections have limits, however. Section 1152 “has no application where the evidence is not tendered as an admission of weakness by the party who settled or offered to settle, but for some other purpose.”

And as another court flatly proclaimed, “[c]ommunications made in the course of settlement discussions are not 'privileged.' ”

121205. This is an edited version of a letter that I sent to my attorney today. This version is shorter and the wording has been tweaked but the key points have been retained.

Two of my proposed settlement changes may have appeared contradictory. I implied I'd agree not to contact institutions and I also implied I wouldn't agree to this. To clarify things, I'd probably agree not to contact a specific and strictly limited list of institutions for the purposes of “harassment” provided that consensual interaction provided me with safe harbor against “harassment” charges.

In short, if an individual at a listed institution agreed to speak with me on a consensual basis, there wouldn't be a REDACTED thing the Kiralys could do about it. This needs to be spelled out.

I've been doing more reading. It's time to spell out something else.

In the end, the full story is going to come out. Hoge Fenton and the Kiralys may wish to consider what that will mean. I've been a fool at times but I shake my head at the remarkable choices that James Kiraly, Grace Kiraly, Thomas Kiraly, Kenneth Kiraly, and Michael Bonetto have made.

What did these people think would happen when James Kiraly, somebody who was violent in the past and remains obsessive and disturbed, lied to prevent his son from writing a book?

Especially when the lies can and will be documented. And the documentation can and will be provided to advocacy groups throughout the country for years to come.

James Kiraly and Thomas Kiraly, in particular, have no leverage. They are simply hurting Grace Kiraly. But, then, they never truly cared for the wife and mother of their family. Or supported her as Robert, the “good” son and the scapegoat, did for decades.

I've been told that there was no basis for CLETS and that, if I lose Long Cause, it will be due to lawful and appropriate research I conducted subsequent to the filing of false and fraudulent actions. Or to lawful and appropriate voicemail messages that I left at Hoge Fenton; those messages are on my websites and I stand by every word.

The issue, I'm told, is that appearances are what matter. I was supposed to remain silent. But this was something I could not do.

Regardless, is it true that no judge could order the types of broad limits on consensual third party interactions the Kiralys are demanding and make them stick?

Especially when one of the third parties involved, a church, has contacted me and offered me assistance? Additionally, it should be noted that the conflict between the church's goals and the Kiralys' goals will eventually lead to publicity.

I feel the light of publicity may be helpful here.

The church stands for Christ and His perspective. The Kiralys stand for abuse, lies, and hatred of the Constitutive Other. I am, in fact, going to write about the contrast. The Kiralys seek to prevent this. But they have already lost.

Michael Bonetto, I'm addressing you directly. You should have received proposed settlement changes by now. And I trust you see the clarification above. Advise your clients to put aside their fantasies of covering up what they've done.

Let's be clear. Long Cause won't stop the books. There will be no cover-up of emotional and physical abuse, pleadings so close to perjury as to make little difference, violations of standards, abuse of process, and possibly actual prosecutable crimes on the part of you and/or your clients.

As a closing note, you said you'd like to be left out of the “fray”. But you made decisions. As the Kiralys would say, live with the consequences.

You're part of the story now. Regardless of the outcome of Long Cause, I'll expect interviews with you. You may decline. But the project will proceed. The story will be told.

121204. Michael Bonetto of Hoge Fenton has raised multiple issues related to my websites. One issue seems especially odd. In a letter to my attorney, Michael said:

“While I do not make that a condition, as a matter of professional courtesy, myself and my firm would appreciate if you would urge your client to leave us out of the fray and at least take down the websites which clearly [sic] the likeness of members of our firm.”

But, as of the current date, there are no pictures of Michael or Hoge Fenton employees on my websites. Just links to Michael's own website. In short, Michael seems to be complaining that his own website has a picture of him.

Michael is not presently demanding that I remove his photo from his website. That's good as, if he doesn't like his picture, he should edit his site himself. But Michael has apparently said that he wishes to “do something” about my own sites and/or about me in general. As a related note, I am not presently beloved at Hoge Fenton.

And Michael included a demand for takedown of content inside a document that's linked below. An important document that he's trying to get removed. So he's trying to takedown a takedown.

Michael says this about the document: “I also request that your client remove the link to confidential documents and intellectual property prepared by our office for purposes of settlement.”

The document in question concerns me, was prepared for me to review, and I never agreed to treat it as confidential. I don't consider it confidential, but the legal issues involved need to be looked at. I posted the document for two reasons:

1. I wanted to document something known as Abuse of Process from beginning to end. A situation where an obsessive compulsive man with emotional difficulties, somebody who had been physically violent in the past, initiated a fraudulent CLETS action against a former victim to slow down research related to the writing of a book.

The man in question was James Kiraly, former Vice President of Transamerica and my father. I am Robert Kiraly. The book was my project.

2. I feel that the controversial document which Michael Bonetto is seeking to take down is evidence of what the Kiraly Cases are all about. Read it carefully and note the focus on third parties, including the general public as suggested by the website demand.

James Kiraly is concerned that I may speak to third parties about his past. The document proposes that I be charged thousands of dollars if I talk to people.

Note: The proposed financial penalty for discussing abuse committed by James Kiraly has now been dropped. Possibly because I posted Michael's attempt to do this.

Ironically, I never intended to focus on what James had done. The book was to be a positive work about people and relationships in general. James's actions have left me little choice in the matter, though. Our lives, those of the Kiraly Family, are public now.

I don't know how long I'll be able to keep the document up. But it's here for now if people are curious. Get it while you can.

To read or download the PDF version, click here. For a web page version of the PDF, click here instead.

One minor edit on 130825 for clarity.

121203. I haven't been able to focus on the job search for a while. Not since June. There's been so much to do on the legal fronts. If I understand correctly, this may be the way that Michael and James planned it.

I wasn't supposed to be able to afford to contest my abuser's actions. Or his desire to silence me, which is demonstrated by Michael Bonetto's recent document and past statements. Not even if I never intended to proceed as James believed.

Good Lord. No wordplay intended. I called Pastor Ron, with my mother's permission, to ask the Pastor about “Christ Followers”. James Kiraly implied I'd talked to the Pastor about past abuse; James's actions, so long ago.

I didn't talk to the Pastor about it. And what did James imagine would happen when he filed a CLETS to stop a book? What fantasies filled his head? That I'd quietly disappear as though by magic? Evaporate like the night mist at dawn? Not likely. And everything is public now. Irony on top of irony.

I had no plans but to work on a positive book. That has all changed now. Maybe it was for the best. Perhaps this is what was supposed to happen.

121203. This is a new letter to my attorney; sent on Monday 121203. Edited for length.

Steps to take

1. Payment. Provide me with cost estimates for the current steps. Tell Thomas S. that we're discussing the estimates.

2. Employment Declaration. You should have received that document today. Proceed as we've discussed.

3. Subpoena Grace Kiraly. May we proceed with the subpoena? If possible, use wording which makes it clear that my mother, Grace Kiraly, will need to be questioned for the record regarding a number of issues:

The fact that Grace Kiraly's husband, James Kiraly, suffered from emotional problems and was physically violent at times; the fact that discussions prior to the end of 2011 with James and Grace were 100% consensual; the fact that Grace abrogated the only request not to communicate that was ever made by any party; the fact that Grace not only abrogated the request, she traveled hundreds of miles to do so in person; the fact that Grace gave me permission to phone Pastor Ron at her church.

The fact that no request for money was ever made or implied; the fact that I responded with a strong negative when Grace herself brought up money; the fact that I was threatened with the police immediately after I requested help with a book that I was working on; and other facts that Michael Bonetto of Hoge Fenton may find inconvenient.

4. Meet and Confer.

5. Motion to Limit Scope.

6. Interrogatories and Admissions of Truth.

7. New Demands for Production of Evidence.

8. Notify OPC. In the interests of transparency, Michael Bonetto should be advised that he himself has provided me with all of the addresses that I was ordered not to seek. For example, the Pismo Beach, California address for James and Grace Kiraly; the Glenview, Kentucky address for Thomas and Karen Kiraly; and the Middleton, Wisconsin address for Riane Kiraly. Therefore the order not to seek these addresses is arguably moot.

For other parties who may read this letter on the Kiraly Christ Follower site, Riane Kiraly is the girl whose theft of a dollar at age seven led, in part, to this odd situation.

As a related note, and again in the interests of transparency, the document in which Michael provided the Kiraly addresses has been posted online. For more about the sites, see the Appendix towards the end of this letter.

9. Subpoena Unredacted Phone Records. For James and Grace Kiraly, we should seek records of local calls as well as long distance; i.e., calls to the Pismo Beach area where Michael Bonetto indicates that they reside. Photocopies of phone bills won't show local numbers. The subpoena needs to go to the phone company.

We also need phone records for Thomas Kiraly. Long-distance records should be sufficient in Thomas's case. I don't think we presently need calls that Thomas made to the Glenview, Kentucky area where Michael Bonetto says that Thomas lives.

10. Torts Actions. I'd like to request additional advice related to torts actions based on abuse of process.

11. Next Settlement Offer. I've reviewed the recent “offer” from Michael Bonetto. The unusual document which demands that I never “discuss” the Kiralys with third parties and that seeks to impose a penalty of thousands of dollars per discussion. Seeks the takedown of site content as well. Limits that dramatically expand the scope of the original orders.

I'd like to make a formal counter-offer. Our counter-offer will be quite reasonable. One requirement is that any limitation that is not imposed by the original orders is ruled out.

Another requirement is that James Kiraly, a former abuser who is actively seeking to prevent work on a positive book, will formally acknowledge a number of facts. May I send you a detailed outline and is it possible for the offer to be made?

Appendix: Remarks About the Sites

12. Michael Bonetto demands that I remove his name from the content of my sites. The content as opposed to the domain names. To be clear, this will never happen. Michael, by virtue of his decisions, is part of the story and this will continue to be the case.

Michael should be advised that documents related to the Kiraly Cases are starting to move online. Eventually, everything related to the Kiralys' attempts to quietly cover things up will be there.

Regardless of the outcome, Long Cause will not end the distribution of the facts. As a related note, see remarks about mirror sites made in the past.

Over time, Internet presence will include a lawful and appropriate biography of Michael as well as one for each of the Kiralys. An attempt will be made to analyze each person's life and to understand how he or she could make the decisions that he or she did.

Decisions to promote the mistreatment of women and children. Decisions to look away from the truth. To look instead into the mirror and say to one's reflection, “I see a hero”.