Friday, November 21, 2014

Kelley Lynch Email To IRS Re. Leonard Cohen, City Attorney & District Attorney Of Los Angeles, Federal Tax & Corporate Matters & Criminal Witness Tampering

From: Kelley Lynch <>
Date: Fri, Nov 21, 2014 at 5:56 PM
Subject: Trial Transcript Review
To: IRS cc:  Multiple Recipients

Hello IRS,

Prosecutor Sandra Jo Streeter seems to have some utterly deranged view of IRS rules and reporting requirements.  I would like your formal Opinion on a number of issues.  First of all, how many times have I requested tax documents, asked Cohen to provide me with IRS required form 1099, asked Cohen to rescind the illegal LCI K-1s, attempted to address the TH K-1s and phantom income shifted to me but not distributed, requested a proper accounting (and not a meaningless list of numbers), asked for clarification about my legitimate commissions attached to royalties Cohen deposited into his personal account, asked Cohen to address my legitimate ownership interest in the intellectual property pursuant to the non-revocable assignments, raised issues related to the federal and state corporate tax returns and documents Cohen's representatives prepared, corporate and business matters, and other legitimate business issues?  

I intend to review the alleged emails Streeter and Cohen are "discussing."  See the April 18, 2011 emails attached.  Streeter willfully and knowingly skipped over the legitimate IRS issues and moved onto "Phil Spector."   This is how she plays her game and conceals information.  The Anonymous prosecutor also concealed evidence.  When you conceal information that prevents the trier of facts from understanding the totality of circumstances that is willful concealment and an attempt to obstruct justice.  In any event, Streeter wanted to elicit testimony about Phil Spector and a gun.  Cohen testified that he was copied in on the April 18, 2011 email but he was NOT.  See attached.  He said he received that email that was sent at 8.11 AM.  Leonard Cohen told me for approximately 20 years that Phil Spector never held a gun on him.  I was in shock when the PD let me review the email Cohen sent Streeter on April 5, 2011 with a Phil Spector alleged gun incident and noted that Cohen is evil.  I explained that Cohen told me he advised LASD that Phil Spector never held a gun on him and his stories were good rock 'n roll stories that were highly embellished.  Well, now he has three versions of that gun story before LA Superior Court so you tell me - what version do you believe?

My lawyer was correct:  this trial was nothing other than an attempt to sabotage IRS; discredit me (and probably silence me); and the DA didn't want the Spector verdict overturned.  I think it's obvious why Streeter elicited tesitmony about Phil Spector.  But the foundation for doing so is fraudulent and, from my perspective, criminal.  I would like an IRS Opinion on the legality of Streeter's questioning Cohen and me about federal tax matters and LYING about them.

On another note, Gianelli is now evidently criminally harassing my old friend, Dan Meade.  This is a highly coordinated case of cyber-terrorism, stalking, witness intimidation, etc. related to Leonard Cohen's "alleged" tax fraud, IRS, and Phil Spector.  Dan Meade has provided me with a declaration and he is indeed a witness.  The witness intimidation continues.

How many times does IRS require someone to request IRS required tax information?  Streeter has misled the jurors over that situation and has lied about this matter extensively.  And then, she retaliated.  Of course, she concealed the fact - from me and my lawyers - that her office worked with Stephen Gianelli prior to the April 2012 trial which I think demands an investigation.  They continued to work with him on the probation retaliation violation.  

They don't call it LA Confidential for no reason.  It is as corrupt as one can imagine.

All the best,

Review all evidence – February 2011 – 2012.

Streeter:  And do you remember when the trial from Mr. Spector happened?  Was it before or after Ms. Lynch left your employ?  Cohen:  I think it was during that period.  I’m not sure.  Streeter:  But it was around the same time.  Cohen:  Yes.  Streeter:  And prior to her leaving your employ, you had no contact with anybody else on that case; is that right?  Cohen:  Oh, no, none whatsoever.  Streeter:  Now, you mentioned that she would also mention, talk about Mr. Spector in the emails.  I’m going to show – ask you a couple of questions about those emails.  Do you recall getting an email from Ms. Lynch on approximately April 18, 2011 at about 5.44 AM?  Cohen:  I know that occasionally there were some very early calls.  Streeter:  This is an email message.  Cohen:  I would have to be refreshed.  RT 160

Streeter:  I have People’s 13.  Now, thinking back to the emails that you received from Ms. Lynch about Mr. Spector, would she use his whole name or would she use part of his name, or did it vary?  Cohen:  It varied, but I think it was usually Phil Spector … Occasionally when she spoke of him as someone she knew well, I think she would call him Phillip.  Streeter:  I’m going to show you an email.  It’s – April 18, 2011.  I misspoke.  It’s at 8.11 AM.  Just look at the first page on the date.  See if that refreshes your recollection.  Let me know when you’ve done.  Cohen:  Yes Ma’am.  Streeter:  Did – does that refresh your recollection as to whether or not you received an email on April 18, 2011 at approximately 8.11 AM in the morning.  Cohen:  Yes, this is the email I received.  Streeter:  See if that email helps you recall whether or not there was any mention of either a Phil, a Phillip, or Phil Spector in the email.  Cohen:  In this particular email, Mr. Spector is called Phillip.  Streeter:  Okay.  And on what page is the email?  What page is the mention of Mr. Spector?  Cohen:  I haven’t studied the whole email, but it begins on the first page.  Streeter:  How many pages is that particular email, Mr. Cohen?  Cohen:  Seven pages … Streeter:  Is your name mentioned in any way with Phillip, Mr. Cohen?  Cohen:  Yes.  It says, Cohen told me Phillip never held a gun on him, and that would support what he told LAPD.  RT 160-161 

Leonard Cohen will make up anything.  He testified that I worked for him around the time of Phil Spector’s first trial which began on March 19, 2007.  Cohen and I parted ways on October 21, 2004.  That is nearly 2-1/2 years prior to the beginning of the PS first trial.  Leonard Cohen is not copied in on the April 18, 2011 email as he later testifies and this not only raises issues related to perjury but the fact that this tactic was used to elicit Cohen’s testimony re. Phil Spector and a “gun.”  The earlier emails were to IRS and Michelle Rice re. very serious tax and corporate matters.  Streeter originally mentioned the 5.44 AM email and then decided to say she misspoke and skipped over it.

Streeter:  I’m going to show you an email from December 17th.  Directing you to that email, the bottom of page 3 of the email.  I’m going to ask you to look at it, see if that refreshes your recollection as to whether there is any mention of Mr. Spector and your name … the bottom of page 3.  Cohen:  Yes, I read it.  Streeter:  Is there any mention of Mr. Spector in that email?  Cohen:  Yes.  It says, everyone wants to know about Cohen’s perjury in the Phil Spector matter.  Streeter;  And is that something that Ms. – prior to that date of December 17th, 2011, is that something that Ms. Lynch has accused you of, of perjuring yourself?  Cohen:  Yes.  Ms. Lynch as continually accused me of testifying against Phil Spector in the Secret Grand Jury.  Streeter:  Has she mentioned that in both emails and voice mail messages?  Cohen:  Yes, Ma’am.  Streeter:  Has she mentioned that during the time period of February 2011 to February – the end of February 2012?  Cohen:  Yes, she has.  RT 162-163

Streeter mentions emails from December 29th, 2011 to December  30, 2011.  RT 163

Streeter:  I’m going to direct your specific attention to the email at approximately 7.06 PM.  Do you recall if in such an email, if Ms. Lynch mentioned that – Ms. Lynch  mentioned Mr. Cohen?  I mean, I’m sorry, Mr. Spector.  Cohen:  I’d have to see the email, Ma’am.  Streeter:  Okay.  I misspoke.  It’s 7.19 PM.  And it’s the first page of the email.  RT 163  Streeter:  Look at the first page, Mr. Cohen.  Cohen.  Yes.  PD:  Again I’ll object to hearsay.  Court:  There’s no question pending yet.  Cohen:  I’ve looked through it.  Streeter;  Is there any mention of Mr. Spector in that email, Mr. Cohen?  PD:  Objection; hearsay.  Curt:  Overruled.  Cohen:  Yes.  Many mentions of Mr. Spector.  RT 164  Streeter:  Now, do you recall what the subject line – well this is on the first page.  You saw many mentions of Mr. Spector in that first page of the email; is that correct?  Cohen:  Correct.  Streeter:  Now, do you recall what the subject line o that email said, Mr. Cohen?  Cohen:  The subject says, Kelley Lynch 2004 and 2005 federal tax returns.  Streeter:  Now, previously you testified that that was one of the issues that she had with you.  In looking at that – the first page of that email, do you see any mention at all about requests for tax returns?  Cohen:  No, Ma’am, there isn’t any.  RT 164

Review this evidence.  The “first page” would be the first page ever sent with respect to the thread of emails.  Ask IRS for a formal Opinion re. HOW MANY TIMES an employee has to request a tax document or ask someone to rescind tax documents that were fraudulently issued?  Once, twice, 50 times, 1,000 times, over a period of 10 years perhaps?  Streeter is arguing that one must relentlessly request federal tax information.  That is not what IRS rules and regulations state.  Note:  I do NOT need a K-1 form.  I asked Cohen to rescind the illegal K-1s I received from LCI for the years 2003, 2004, and 2005, and to address the income on the TH K-1s for the years 2001, 2002, and 2003, as well as “phantom income” TH shifted to me that was not distributed; Cohen’s loans totaling approximately $6.7 million from TH; etc.  I am still not, as of the year 2014, in receipt of IRS required form 1099 for the year 2004 although Streeter, Cohen, and Kory lied about this fact.

Streeter:  Do you see any mention of a request for a K-1 form?  Cohen:  No, there isn’t.  Streeter:  Is there any request for a 1099?  Cohen:  Now, how common was it on the emails that you received from Ms. Lynch for the emails to cover subjects other than taxes?  Cohen:  Frequent.  Streeter:  Okay.  Would you say this happens – when you say frequent, would that be half the time, 75 percent of the time?  Can you give us an idea?  Cohen:  It’s just a guess, but I’d say half the time.  RT 165 

Cohen testified that half of all my alleged emails requested tax information.  He later changes his testimony, during this trial, and says that these requests were “hidden” in my emails.  That is the quote the City Attorney’s office elected to use in their utterly shameless and deceitful response to my Appellate Brief.  I have asked the IRS to review all emails they received from me, with Cohen or his lawyers copied in (since I reported Cohen’s tax fraud to IRS in April 2005 and began emailing them evidence), to definitely advise me how many requests there were for tax documents, a proper accounting, corporate information, and other seriously legitimate tax, accounting, legal, corporate, and business matters.

Streeter:  Do you recall testifying at a prior hearing a couple of – about two or three weeks ago on the third floor at a different Court hearing in front of a different judge?  Cohen:  Yes, Ma’am.  Streeter:  And do you recall, in preparing for testifying at that hearing, if you reviewed any emails that you received from Ms. Lynch?  RT 165  Cohen:  Yes, the night before I reviewed all the emails of January 21st and 22nd, I believe … It involved, I think, 32 emails of approximately 50 pages each.  It was over a thousand PAGES of emails.   RT 166  Streeter:  Were these emails printed by your office or the Los Angeles City Attorney?  Cohen:  They were printed at – at my attorney’s office and I think subsequently .. I don’t know but I know they were printed at my attorney’s office.  RT 166

Raises issues about what was printed and where, by whom, etc.  Cohen does not address or retract the testimony from the March 23, 2012 bail hearing where he confirmed that we were in a purely business relationship and I never stole from him – just his “peace of mind.” 

Streeter:  Do you recall whether or not there was any mention of a request for tax returns?  PD:  Objection; foundation as to what documents.  Court:  Yes.  Could you be more specific what you’re referring to?  RT 166  Streeter:  The emails that you said were approximately January 21st, about 30 or so.  Cohen:  Yes, Ma’am.  Streeter:  Do you recall of those emails how many had a request for tax information?  Cohen:  Yes, I do.  Streeter:  How many?  Cohen:  It was mentioned once in the thousand of pages.  RT 167

Review this evidence.

Streeter:  You see the binder that you’ve been looking at, the black one .. Do they have any tabs in them?  Or do they have like paper stuck on them?  … Like stickums?  Cohen:  Paper stickers, yeah.  Streeter:  The binder that was prepared by your attorney, did they have stickums on them or did they have color-coded tabs?  RT 167  Cohen:  They had color-coded references.  RT 167-168

Where is the binder from Cohen’s law firm?

Court:  We are on People’s 15.  Streeter:  Fifteen.  I have a white binder.  It has the name of the case, case and case number.  The emails dated January 19, 2012 to January 21, 2012.

Exhibit 15 – Binder – Emails dated January 19, 2012 to January 21, 2012.

Streeter:  I’m showing you what’s People’s 15 … Do you recognize that binder?  Cohen:  Yes, I do.  Streeter:  Are those the emails that you reviewed previously for another court hearing, Mr. Cohen?  Cohen:  Yes, Ma’am, this is the binder.  RT 168

Cohen just testified that he reviewed the emails the night before the hearing.  Did he take the white binder home?  Did the City Attorney provide him with the binder to take home; is this binder his lawyer’s binder; or the City Attorney’s binder? 

Streeter:  I just want you to look at it [binder] … go through it, and let me know if you recognize anything that’s in there.  RT 169  Court:  Tell him specifically what you want him to review.  Streeter:  Okay.  I’m going to show you – there’s a red – and I want you to direct your attention to an email dated January 21st.  It has a red tab on it.  At approximately 7.40 PM I believe it is.  Cohen:  Yes, Ma’am.  Streeter:  Okay.  Do you recall getting an email from Ms. Lynch on that date and at that time?  Cohen:  Yes, I did.  Streeter:  And the email that you’re looking at, once you received it did you then forward that email to your attorneys’ office.  Cohen:  My attorneys were copied in.  RT 169  Streeter:  Who is the sender of that email?  Cohen:  Kelley Lynch.  RT 170  Streeter:  That’s the only email that made mention of a request for tax information?  Cohen:  That’s correct.  RT 170