Tuesday, April 7, 2015

The Moonlighting Stalker Continues To Criminally Harass LA Residents; Why Is This Acceptable To City Attorney Mike Feuer?

From: Kelley Lynch <kelley.lynch.2010@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, Apr 7, 2015 at 2:13 PM
Subject: Re: Your blog post of April 7, 2015 - Nice try Ms. Lynch, still no sale
To: "STEPHEN R. GIANELLI" <stephengianelli@gmail.com>, "irs.commissioner" <irs.commissioner@irs.gov>, Washington Field <washington.field@ic.fbi.gov>, ASKDOJ <ASKDOJ@usdoj.gov>, "Division, Criminal" <Criminal.Division@usdoj.gov>, "Doug.Davis" <Doug.Davis@ftb.ca.gov>, Dennis <Dennis@riordan-horgan.com>, MollyHale <MollyHale@ucia.gov>, nsapao <nsapao@nsa.gov>, fsb <fsb@fsb.ru>, 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>, "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>, sedelman <sedelman@gibsondunn.com>, JFeuer <JFeuer@gibsondunn.com>, "USLawEnforcement@google.com" <USLawEnforcement@google.com>, Feedback <feedback@calbar.ca.gov>, mike.feuer@lacity.org
Cc: wfrayeh <wfrayeh@da.lacounty.gov>, "Vivienne A. Swanigan" <vivienne.swanigan@lacity.org>, "van.penick" <van.penick@mcinnescooper.com>, Douglas Penick <mpduke1@msn.com>, karen <karen@softwheresolutions.com>

Mike Feuer,

How did the Criminal Stalker know I was in LA when he doesn't know me and I never told him.  He continues to criminally harass Paulette Brandt.  She provided Judge Hess with a declaration about this Criminal.  I will remind you that she is a resident of Los Angeles.  This is one sick individual.  His obsession is obscene.  He targeted my then minor son,  How would I know if this psychopath is a sexual predator, member of NAMBLA, etc.  I do NOT know him.  I'm sure your prosecutors believe it is acceptable for psychopaths to target their sons.  They also think it's acceptable for Cohen to expose his penis to me; steal from me and others; commit criminal tax fraud; perjure himself; etc.  Didn't Cohen confess to perjury on the witness stand re. the statutory required "dating relationship."  The Boulder order is not a domestic violence order.  Sexual harassment and indecent exposure are not dating.  There is no full faith and credit re. the newly created Cali domestic violence order.  Gianelli belongs in prison.  Calling me a drunken slut won't change that fact.

Kelley Lynch

On Tue, Apr 7, 2015 at 2:07 PM, Kelley Lynch <kelley.lynch.2010@gmail.com> wrote:


I know your lawyer spoke to this psychopath Stalker but someone needs to arrest the criminal.  Please simply maintain his criminally harassing emails.  He has also targeted everyone who has provided me with a declaration.  For the record, Richard Dallett wrote me that Gianelli is lying.  Gianelli called him several times and is interest in our brother.l  He doesn't know us and this man is a criminal with motive.


On Tue, Apr 7, 2015 at 2:06 PM, Kelley Lynch <kelley.lynch.2010@gmail.com> wrote:

This psychopath stalker has an interest in your for a reason.  The lengths this moonlighting stalker has gone to target me, my sons, and others is astounding.  He's been criminally harassing Paulette Brandt for two straight years now.  He criminally harassed Ray and Rutger for six straight years.  Read Ray's declaration.  It has now been submitted to Judge Hess with my Motion for Terminating Sanctions that addresses fraud and perjury.  Every word is a lie.  I will soon file a federal RICO suit against Cohen.  

Keep in mind that Gianelli has motive and appears to be on someone's payroll.

On Tue, Apr 7, 2015 at 2:04 PM, Kelley Lynch <kelley.lynch.2010@gmail.com> wrote:

Stephen Gianelli, 

You have been relentlessly harassing me, my sons, family, and friends for six years now - since hearing from Cohen's lawyer, Michelle Rice in May 2009.  You are all over the internet slandering me.  Cohen's judgment is void and I was not served his lawsuit.

My sister's lawyer spoke to you and advised you to cease and desist.  My sons advised you to cease and desist.  Here's my younger son's declaration detailing your, Walsh, and other's criminal harassment of him.

Your obsession with my sons is sickening and you should be viewed as a potential sexual predator since you targeted my younger son as a minor.

I do recall your slandering Ann Diamond on your alleged law blog.  You are moonlighting for someone.  It appears to be either the Spector prosecution or Cohen.  You are definitely aligned with Cohen and harassing me over my Motion for Terminating Sanctions.  Fraud and perjury was not previously addressed with Judge Hess who has no jurisdiction over me.  

I see you are harassing my brother-in-law, Van Penick, and ex-husband.  Do you believe they think you had a right to criminally harass Rutger and Ray for six straight years.  I don't believe Rutger sent that email so you will have to prove that, psychopath.



Thank you very much, Scott.  Kelley

To my knowledge, Scott, this is the first time anyone (other than myself) has bothered to interviewed Kelley Lynch or tried to present her side of the story. Back in 2005, our controlled and spineless media swallowed Leonard Cohen's version whole, portraying him as a harmless, frugal soul who could not possibly have raided his own retirement fund or later have turned on his personal manager to head off a lawsuit against him by his own financial advisers. I think in the end, Kelley Lynch will be exonerated, and a lot of loyal fans will be disappointed.

I used to edit the Blogonaut.Law.Blog, and after we were required to ban Kelley Lynch for posting libelous comments (accusing named persons of serious crimes) she came after me with a vengeance, which placed me on her daily emails list. For several years I received 80 emails a day from her. I also looked into the $7.nch c7M default judgment against her, after Lynch claimed that it was "fraudulent" and that she was "never served" and that the judge who issued it (Judge Freeman) was "corrupt". I read the entire court file, including the evidence that Leonard Cohen submitted to support the default judgment.

I sent this evidence to Ann Diamond several times, most recently earlier this year, and she refused to read through it- saying that she does not have the time or expertise and that she really does not care whether Lynch was guilty or not.

First, it is clear from Kelley Lynch's emails to the lawyer that Cohen hired to sue her (Scott Edelman), which started up the very day that the process server claims Lynch was served, that Kelley Lynch had the suit in hand when she wrote those emails (among them an email calling Edelman's signature on the suit "feminine").

Second, Lynch was notified of her court date in 2006 and emailed Mr. Edelman to say she would not be attending. Instead of filing a single page denial in the suit and/or showing up at the hearing and at least denying she took the money, she did neither. Instead she went to the IRS and accused Cohen of tax fraud. Otherwise she hid from the suit.

Third, attached to the declaration of forensic accountant Kevin L. Prins are the canceled checks (front and back), bank deposit records, and bank statements that PROVE that Kelley Lynch paid herself (in many cases by depositing checks made payable to Cohen directly into her own accounts, and by electronic transfer of funds from Cohen's accounts into her accounts, and through "loans" to herself from Cohen's retirement account) over $5M IN EXCESS of her agreed commission (initially 10%, raised to 15%).

Fourth, Lynch's (belated) 2013 motion to set aside the 2006 $7.9M default judgment was DENIED by Judge Hess on January 17, 2014 and Lynch failed to appeal that ruling. She has filed yet another motion seeking the same orders (vacate and dismiss the judgment) which is not allowed, and on June 23, 2015 this motion will be denied as well). If Lynch makes good with her threat to then sue in federal court, the federal court is required to respect the California judgment under the "good faith and credit clause" of the US Constitution, and the case will be dismissed pursuant to FRCP Rule (12 (a).

THEREFORE, Ann Diamond, there is zero chance that Kelley Lynch will ever be "exonerated" because the case is over - not to mention the fact that the documentary evidence PROVES she embezzled over $5M (the rest of the judgment is interest).

It is a little disingenuous to claim that Lynch is "innocent" unless you have read the evidence.


This is what Ann Diamond (commenting here that she believes that Lynch will be exonerated) said to me by email on 12/13/214 after I sent her the evidence:

"To tell you the truth, it would take me days to go over all the facts and arguments, which I would definitely take the time to do if I needed to know -- but I don't. In fact I'm willing to take your word that there is a strong case against KL, but since I'm not an accountant and can barely balance a chequebook (not that i even have one), I don't see the point.  I will wait for some unbiased third party to examine both sides of the case and render a judgement (when hell freezes over)."

This is what Ann Diamond said in an email dated 12/13/2014:
“To tell you the truth, it would take me days to go over all the facts and arguments, which I would definitely take the time to do if I needed to know -- but I don't. In fact I'm willing to take your word that there is a strong case against KL, but since I'm not an accountant and can barely balance a chequebook (not that i even have one), I don't see the point.  I will wait for some unbiased third party to examine both sides of the case and render a judgement (when hell freezes over).”

Dear Gianelli,
You have no business publishing private emails without permission. For some unknown reason, you began bombarding me last December with unsolicited and unwanted emails from your home in Crete, along with photos of your wife and shiny new tractor. I could post those at your blog if you think they're relevant.

There was no reason for me to read your documents and I have no idea why you sent them. You should have asked if I was interested, I am not a lawyer representing Kelley Lynch, I am not even American, and I have no intention of writing about this case before it's settled in the courts.

I think you need to take your own advice and learn to 'edit.' The world is not your private blog, and nobody has time to read your endless stream of trivia.

+Ann Diamond Ms. Diamond - your emails (which you never asked me to keep private) sing a very different tune that you are posting here, that you believe Ms. Lynch will be "vindicated", that she is innocent. You started following me on Twitter, you sent me a Holliday Greeting on Christmas, you sent Suzanne Walsh a friend request on Facebook, and you were frequenting my Facebook page as well. You stated to me in scores of emails that you believe that Ms. Lynch is "mentally ill" and that you "never believed that she was not served" with Cohen's lawsuit, and yet you publicly take her side here. You apparently like to play both ends against the middle. Okay, fine. But let's be clear on what is going on. 
Show less

There is another side to this story, explained here:http://kelleylynchsociopath.blogspot.gr/2015/03/kelley-lynch-former-manager-who.html

Kelley Lynch is not who she claims to be.

On December 2, 2014 And Diamond wrote me about Kelley Lynch saying "I don't have an opinion on her guilt or innocence."