Gary “Cash” Joseph Bonas II
25794 Covala Court
Valencia, California 91355
January 17, 2012
Justice Conseulo Marshall Bonnie Dumanis, Esq.
United States District Court Phyllis Shess, Esq.
312 North Spring Street Carol A. Buck, Esq.
Room G-8 Ofc District Attorney
Los Angeles, Calif. 90012 330 W Broadway #750
San Diego, California 92101
Re: Milberg’s People v. Bonas, Case No. SCD159416 (San Diego Sup. Ct.)
Dear Honorable Justice,
This submission is made pursuant to the court’s order that Bonas produce a certified copy
of the “entire files” related to the above referenced criminal complex law and economic matter.
It is presented in light of the contextual background previously submitted to aid the court’s full
understanding.
Specifically, this part of the certified file keys in on what the county-state of San Diego,
advocating on behalf of Wall Street’s firms against Bonas, has publicly represented is a contract
under which it is legally authorized to act on against Bonas.
Exhibit 1 - 10-06-03 Court – “Will re-consider O.R. bail with current Psych. Report”
Exhibit 2 - 11-24-03 MD JD Alan Arthur Abrams Bonas Report re: O.R. Bail
Exhibit 3 - 12-14-03 Ph.D Katherine Difrancesca Bonas Report re: O.R. Bail
Exhibit 4 - 12-30-03 Hearing Transcript re: O.R. Bail
Exhibit 5 - 02-03-05 Bonas’s briefing to County-State, U.P.S. tracking No. 56937735
Exhibit 6 - 01-13-11 Bonas’ Ph.D. letter – effort seeking qualified psychological assistance
This short business letter supplements Bonas’ 01-11-12 (mistakenly dated 01-11-11) request for
files San Diego County possesses, but were not included, removed, suppressed or otherwise
concealed from the subject file in the above matter.
For further context, F.B.I. (and its counterpart Wayne Maxey) testified as follows:
1
A. Originally, Mr. Bonas appeared … to speak about the [economic] lawsuit, the
content of the lawsuit, and … when he was not getting … a response, his e-mails
turned more agitated … in tone.1
The “content” of the subject cartel suit was, in part, was contained in the following dated memos,
e.g., which your people possessed before it filed both of its “verified” actions against Bonas:
Exhibit 1 - 02-26-01 Bonas to The Firms - Direct Proof of Firms’ Cartel - Offer
Exhibit 2 - 03-10-01 Bonas to “Brand Name Firms” - Briefs filed over reps objection
Exhibit 3 - 03-17-01 Bonas to “The Firms” - Direct Cartel Proof – Esq. Concealment
Your office never insured that Bonas was provided your bated stamped copy of this or any other
information. Indeed, after requesting a copy, Bonas’ fiduciary defenders’ (Tamara Lave & Steve
Carroll) specifically denied him, stating, “It is too expensive to make a copy of your file for you,
so you don’t get one.”2 This is why Bonas does not have any bate- stamped or otherwise
certified copies of this material information. He did, however, preserve exact copies from your
related federal case and/or from his own back up files. See attached Exhibits 1, 2 and 3, e.g.
If you would be so kind as to: 1) preserve your entire Bonas file(s); and 2) produce your
bate stamped copy of the above documents for production to the Central District pursuant to its
OSC order, that would be appreciated. Those files, so you know, provide critical evidentiary
context of, .e.g., direct proof of a firm “furnish on request combination” put on record:3
Q. During the course of your [FBI] investigation, did you interview David Noonan of
Post, Kirby, Noonan & Sweat in San Diego?
A. Yes.
Q. On what date did that interview first take place?
A. On April 6, 2001.4
…
A. Mr. Noonan’s specialty is antitrust [cartel member] litigation.5
…
Q. Exhibit 6 … was another e-mail forwarded to Mr. Noonan from Mr. Stone … on
03-22-01, indicating his offer to clean up the … case just doubled …?
A. Yes, that’s correct.6
…
Q. Exhibit 7, … is another e-mail Mr. Noonan had forwarded to him from Stone
….?
A. Yes.
Q. And does it indicate that his book would only be sold to him, Mr. Spooner and
Mr. Noonan?
A. Yes, that’s true.7
1
10-03-03 hearing transcript, at page 9, lines 15-19, (San Diego Court Case No. SDC159416, DA No. AAL083), aka, Milberg et al. v. Bonas.
2
If your county is not financially able to provide basic due process stuff to citizens, perhaps it shouldn’t hunt them in the first place.
3
United States v. Container Corp., 393 U.S. 333 (1969) (“The reciprocal exchange of [cash’s] price
information was concerted action … of course, sufficient to establish the … conspiracy, the initial
ingredient of a violation ….”).
4
Milberg’s People v. Bonas, 10-03-03 hearing transcript, at page 25, lines 22-28 (San Diego Case No. SDC159416, DA No. AAL083).
5
Milberg’s People v. Bonas, 10-03-03 hearing transcript, at page 40, lines 16-17 (San Diego Court Case No. SDC159416, DA No. AAL083).
6
10-03-03 hearing transcript, at page 47, lines 17-23, (San Diego Court Case No. SDC159416, DA No. AAL083), aka, Milberg et al. v. Bonas.
2
…
Q. Exhibit 8 …, was another e-mail forwarded to Mr. Noonan from James Layden
from Arnold & Porter …?
A. Yes, it is.8
…
Q. Exhibit 9, … is another e-mail sent to Mr. Noonan from James Layden
indicating, again, the subject of criminal increased prices ….9
…
Q. How did he view some of the … voice mails.
A. At first somewhat bothersome …. Some of them [stet all] dealt with the actual
litigation ….10
If you don’t understand the legal import of the Wall Street chain details (specifically
cited) in the enclosed materials, Mr. Bonas is prepared to explain, as he always has been.
Thank you for assisting Bonas: 1) in complying with the Central District’s OSC order; &
2) in reporting, pursuant to the ethical rules, misconduct akin to your client Milberg’s long
running “kickback” conspiracy by perjury to the tune of hundreds of millions of dollars, e.g.
Happy New Year,
https://skydrive.live.com/redir.aspx?cid=c82bea96c59fd739&resid=C82BEA96C59FD739!9661&parid=C82BEA96C59F
D739!9464
Gary “Cash” Joseph Bonas II
Table of Proof
(Declaration)
I, Gary “Cash” Joseph Bonas II, declare that the following are true and correct copies of
public information and/or slightly edited copies of fact based correspondence in the back to back
criminal-criminal Fed-State actions against Bonas:
Exhibit 1 - 02-26-01 Bonas to The Firms - Direct Proof of Firms’ Cartel - Offer
Exhibit 2 - 03-10-01 Bonas to “Brand Name Firms” - Briefs filed over reps objection
Exhibit 3 - 03-17-01 Bonas to “The Firms” - Direct Cartel Proof – Esq. Concealment
Leaking “IT” - A Firm Business Threat
Exhibit 4 - 10-03-03 Certified excerpts of Hearing Transcript in Milberg et at. v. Bonas
Exhibit 5 - 06-30-06 Fed Defender Sean Kennedy (M. Stratton’s replacement) to Bonas,
“[T]he documents … I don’t understand.”11
I swear under penalty of perjury that the above is true and correct.
Date: January 15, 2012 By: ____________________________
7
10-03-03 hearing transcript, at pages 47:26-48:5 (San Diego Court Case No. SDC159416, DA No. AAL083), aka, Milberg et al. v. Bonas.
8
10-03-03 hearing transcript, at page 48:8-15 (San Diego Court Case No. SDC159416, DA No. AAL083), aka, Milberg et al. v. Bonas.
9
10-03-03 hearing transcript, at page 48:17-22 (San Diego Court Case No. SDC159416, DA No. AAL083), aka, Milberg et al. v. Bonas.
10
10-03-03 hearing transcript, at page 43, lines 12-16, (San Diego Court Case No. SDC159416, DA No. AAL083), aka, Milberg et al. v. Bonas.
11
06-30-06 Defender Sean K. Kennedy to Bonas while in the State’s Federal Citizen Prison Camp.
3
Gary “Cash” Joseph Bonas II
Partial Service List
A.G. Kamala D. Harris Central Intelligence Agency
Att. Corporate Fraud Section Office of Public Affairs
California Department of Justice Washington, D.C. 20505
Attn: Public Inquiry Unit
P.O. Box 944255
Sacramento, Calif. 94244-2550
Professor Lynne L. Dallas Douglas Aaron Axel
University of San Diego Law Sidley Austin LLP
5998 Alcalá Park 555 W 5th St
San Diego, Cal. 92110-2492 Los Angeles, Cal. 90013
Richard Joel Neely Robert Scott Dreher
5032 Hastings Rd 835 5th Ave Ste 202
San Diego, Calif. 92116 San Diego, Cal. 92101
*A. For you [DA] to bring someone else’s statement to him, that’s the third level of
hearsay.12
*“In the first amendment context, … a [speech crime] law may be invalidated as
“overbroad” if … “its applications are unconstitutional,” judged in relation to the
statute’s plainly legitimate sweep.13
12
10-03-03 hearing transcript, at page 51:9-12 (San Diego Court Case No. SDC159416, DA No. AAL083), aka, Milberg et al. v. Bonas.
13
United States v. Stevens, 559 U.S. ___, 130 S.Ct. 1577 (2010).
4