Tuesday, February 17, 2015

Kelley Lynch's Email To Los Angeles City Attorney Re. Stephen Gianelli's Criminal Harassment Over "Vivienne Swanigan"

From: Kelley Lynch 
Date: Tue, Feb 17, 2015 at 5:05 AM
Subject: Fwd: Swanigan email
To: "irs.commissioner" <irs.commissioner@irs.gov>, Washington Field <washington.field@ic.fbi.gov>, ASKDOJ <ASKDOJ@usdoj.gov>, MollyHale <MollyHale@ucia.gov>, nsapao <nsapao@nsa.gov>, fsb <fsb@fsb.ru>, "Doug.Davis" <Doug.Davis@ftb.ca.gov>, Dennis <Dennis@riordan-horgan.com>, rbyucaipa <rbyucaipa@yahoo.com>, khuvane <khuvane@caa.com>, blourd <blourd@caa.com>, Robert MacMillan <robert.macmillan@gmail.com>, a <anderson.cooper@cnn.com>, wennermedia <wennermedia@gmail.com>, Mick Brown <mick.brown@telegraph.co.uk>, woodwardb <woodwardb@washpost.com>, "glenn.greenwald" <glenn.greenwald@firstlook.org>, lrohter <lrohter@nytimes.com>, Harriet Ryan <harriet.ryan@latimes.com>, "hailey.branson" <hailey.branson@latimes.com>, "stan.garnett" <stan.garnett@gmail.com>, 
Cc: mike.feuer@lacity.org

Mike Feuer,

I don't want to be criminally harassed over "Swanigan" or with "Swanigan" copied in.  I have filed formal claims with the City and County and do not appreciate this harassment.  Your office worked with a criminal to entrap me.  I find it not only gravely offensive but extremely unconscionable.  A jury will decide if Swanigan intended to have Gianelli harass me and communicate a preposterous statement from your office to me.  Also, Swanigan testified that she didn't know who started the communications with your office.  I do - Gianeli when he wrote Streeter on November 12, 2012 criminally harassing me and slandering me.  Interesting your office wouldn't know that.  

Kelley Lynch

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Stephen Gianelli <stephengianelli@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, Feb 17, 2015 at 4:26 AM
Subject: Swanigan email
To: Kelley Lynch <kelley.lynch.2010@gmail.com>
Cc: Vivienne Swanigan <vivienne.swanigan@lacity.org>

Ms. Lynch,

I don't think Swanigan's email requesting me - if I am intent on corresponding with you to begin with (which she discouraged) - to please make explicit that I am not in league with Ms. Streeter OR her observation that my correspondence defending Ms. Streeter was stoking your delusion to that effect means what you think it means. 

It certainly cannot be fairly read as asking me to "harass" you. 

Sent from my BlackBerry 10 smartphone.