Wednesday, February 11, 2015

Kelley Lynch's Email To Leonard Cohen's Lawyer Re: Federal Tax Matters & The Settlement Agreement Between Cohen & His Tax Lawyer

From: Kelley Lynch <>
Date: Wed, Feb 11, 2015 at 1:34 PM
To: Jeffrey Korn <>, "irs.commissioner" <>, Washington Field <>, ASKDOJ <>, "Division, Criminal" <>, "Doug.Davis" <>, Dennis <>, MollyHale <>, nsapao <>, fsb <>, rbyucaipa <>, khuvane <>, blourd <>, Robert MacMillan <>, a <>, wennermedia <>, Mick Brown <>, woodwardb <>, "glenn.greenwald" <>, lrohter <>, Harriet Ryan <>, "hailey.branson" <>, "stan.garnett" <>, sedelman <>, JFeuer <>, "kevin.prins" <>,, Sherab Posel <>, Feedback <>


I still require the federal and state tax information I've requested.  I see nothing in the default judgment that indicates it was retroactive and Cohen has no "obligation" to provide me with IRS required tax and corporate information for the years 2004 and 2005.  The default judgment was not entered until May 2006, six months after Cohen received his fraudulent refund from IRS so they didn't uphold the default judgment.

Michelle Rice felt comfortable emailing [me] at least twice and lying to me with the IRS, FBI, Treasury, Dennis Riordan, and Ron Burkle copied in so I think her testimony that providing me with tax information would violate the restraining order is obscene.  The IRS doesn't require my participation in a discovery process in order to receive IRS required tax information - including the 2004 1099 that neither IRS nor I am in possession of.  

No Court advised Cohen that he had no requirements to provide me with IRS required tax information.  No Court advised Cohen to illegally include me on LCI K-1s for the years 2003, 2004, and 2005.  Cohen sent all my alleged emails to his lawyers, as he testified, but never brought the tax information requests to their attention.  Who would believe this besides LA Superior Court?

I need a copy of Cohen/Westin's settlement agreement.  Cohen testified that Westin, in hindsight (after we parted ways), rectified my ownership interest in TH as a "mistake."  The federal tax returns are now a serious issue as I was included as a partner for the years 2001, 2002, and 2003.  Furthermore, Cohen's nearly $6.7 million in loans/expenditures were not repaid with interest.  I suppose Cohen believes IRS signed off on that also?  

Kelley Lynch

PD:  Okay.  Now, you were aware that 99.5% of that company was owned by Ms. Lynch, correct?  Cohen:  That was a mistake and it was rectified by the lawyer who drew up the papers.  And in arbitration a substantial sum of money was awarded me for his mistake.  PD:  And that lawyer’s name?  Cohen:  Richard Westin.  PD:  And you had arbitration with him?  Cohen:  That’s correct.  

PD:  So are you saying that in seven years that you’ve been employed as Mr. Cohen’s counsel, you’ve never contacted Ms. Lynch and provided her any documentation that she’s requested.  Rice:  Well, I’m not Ms. Lynch’s attorney, so it would be improper for me to provide her with any information.  I’m Mr. Cohen’s attorney.  And to the extent that she’s asking for tax information, we don’t have that information.  PD:  Okay.  So you have never sent her any of the information she’s asked for?  Rice:  I’m not under any obligation to.  PD:  I understand you’re not under any obligation.  Have you or have you not sent that?  Rice:  I have not sent Ms. Lynch anything … PD:  To your knowledge, has Mr. Cohen ever directly sent Ms. Lynch any documentation?  Rice:  It would be a violation of the restraining order.  PD:  Is that your understanding, that if he sent her documents, he would be violating the restraining order?  Rice:  It is my understanding.  RT 361-362 

PD:  Okay.  I’m asking you if you were – and if you could just try to limit your answer to the question – there was information – there were requests in those emails for tax information, correct?  Cohen:  Yes, Sir.  PD:  What did you do since you got those emails to give those documents to Ms. Lynch?  I’m asking what you did.  Cohen:  I – I brought those emails to the attention of my lawyer and, eventually, to the police.  PD:  Okay.  Did you ever bring that attention to whoever handled your taxes?  Cohen:  Yes, Sir.  And it was determined by two courts of this country and the IRS that – PD:  Objection, Your Honor, non-responsive.  Cohen:  No.  It was determined, Sir, that I had no tax responsibility in regard to Ms. Lynch.  The two courts had decided that money had been taken from me.  PD:  Objection, Your Honor, non-responsive. Court:  Overruled.  Cohen:  Two courts had given me a default – or one court had given me a default judgment, the other court affirmed that default judgment.  But, more significantly, the IRS accepted the results of the default judgment and awarded me a tax refund, so Ms. Lynch had no cause to ask me for any taxation information.  The forensic report on which the default judgments were made were very specific and Ms. Lynch has read them.  That is the forensic report that Ms. Lynch has been asking for.  The only problem is she doesn’t like the results.  PD:  Okay.  Do you remember what my question was?  Streeter:  Objection; argumentative, Your Honor.  Court;  Sustained.  PD:  I’m asking you if – Court;  Why don’t you re-ask the question if you don’t think it’s been answered.  PD:  Did you talk to your manager who handles your tax to request those documents from 2001 to 2004?  Cohen:  No, Sir.  PD:  Okay.  Did you go about seeing about the K-1 that was being requested; yes or no?  Cohen:  No, Sir.  PD:  Did you go and give them Ms. Lynch’s information for you to send that information to?  Cohen:  No, Sir.  PD:  And we’ll get back to that judgment at a later time.  RT 279-283