Friday, May 22, 2015

Stephen Gianelli Is Obviously A Member Of Leonard Cohen's Legal Team & Has Targeted Kelley Lynch & Paulette Brandt; There Is No Domestic Violence Order (Abusive Legal Tactic Or Otherwise)

From: Kelley Lynch <>
Date: Fri, May 22, 2015 at 10:10 AM
To: "*irs. commissioner" <*>, Washington Field <>, ": Division, Criminal" <>, "Doug.Davis" <>, Dennis <>, MollyHale <>, nsapao <>, fsb <>, "Kelly.Sopko" <>,, rbyucaipa <>, khuvane <>, blourd <>, Robert MacMillan <>, a <>, wennermedia <>, Mick Brown <>, "glenn.greenwald" <>, lrohter <>, Harriet Ryan <>, "hailey.branson" <>, "stan.garnett" <>, "" <>, Feedback <>,, "mayor.garcetti" <>

IRS, FBI, and DOJ,

The Criminal Stalker continues to write arguing Leonard Cohen's legal matter.  He is now representing a woman who absolutely defrauded Paulette Brandt of rental arrears.  She was advised, and this is what SHE told people, that Robert Kory said to sue me.  Do not overlook the fact that Paulette Brandt was Phil Spector's girlfriend and personal assistant until Michelle Blaine targeted him.

I am not harassing anyone.  I am being harassed, stalked, threatened, etc.  So are nearly every one of my witnesses.  What Court is going to hold me in contempt?  This man is engaged in very serious criminal conduct.  That is blatantly obvious and it has gone on for six straight years with many people - including both of my sons.

I didn't make a statement to Gianelli about Leonard Cohen's fraudulent "domestic violence" order.  I have been clear, and just addressed this with Michelle Rice (attorney of record), that I refuse to address this with a criminal stalker who appears to be an unofficial member of Cohen's legal team.  I have no idea who would hire any of these individuals to represent them.

A non-domestic violence order may not be entered into a California database as a domestic violence order.  That is wire fraud and will be addressed as such in my RICO suit.  I am filing a motion to vacate and spoke to a Commissioner at the court about this matter.  

Leonard Cohen's lawyer, Stephen Gianelli, has performed a "diligent on-line-search for such published California appellate decision ..."  The Court - not the Criminal Stalker - will decide if my motion to vacate is utterly and completely frivolous and without merit.  I know Leonard Cohen's lawsuit, which he failed to serve me, was.  It was useful when defending himself against allegations - with IRS - that he committed criminal tax fraud.

I willfully violated nothing.  The Boulder Combined Court advised me, and others, that the permanent order expired on February 15, 2009.  This matter, as it is now also a federal matter, will be addressed in my RICO lawsuits.  I didn't know it was a domestic violence order during my trial or when my appeal was filed.  It would be hard to raise something LA Superior Court brought to my attention in the spring of 2013.

I'm not emailing this psychopath.  He has been advised to cease and desist and continues to criminally harass me, witnesses, and many others.  I think it's important to keep in mind, particularly with respect to Paulette Brandt, that Gianelli argues Spector prosecution theories online; targeted my blogs and email accounts with Michelle Blaine (who I view as the female Leonard Cohen), and works in tandem with Kelly Green to this date.  Green was posting on a blog that demonized Spector and glorified "Alan Jackson" in 2007.  This is not all a coincidence.  It's a "plan."  Von Watteville has now inserted herself into this situaion and her conduct is and has been harassing, slanderous, etc.  

And, Gianelli just writes to update me about Phil Spector and questions me.  I don't want to hear from this man about Phil Spector.  He is lying about him online.  Lana Clarkson's DNA was on the gun and ammunition.  The gun was not Phil Spector's.  Gianelli's buddy, who Green HATES, Bruce Cutler informed the jury (and Mick Brown) of that fact.  


Date: Fri, May 22, 2015 at 9:26 AM
Subject: RE: Your additional email referencing "Cohen's fraud domestic violence order" and your threatened "motion to vacate" same dated Friday, May 22, 2015 2:46
To: Kelley Lynch <>
Cc: "Vivienne A. Swanigan" <>

Ms. Lynch,

The reason you keep getting returned to jail for criminal harassment (and are headed the again for harassment and contempt) is that you fail to respect the difference between criminal harassment and other permissible forms of communication, including responding to your many silly legal claims.

You made a statement: That you would be moving to vacate the Leonard Cohen’s “fraud domestic violence order”, apparently a reference to the May 25, 2011 California registration of the September 2, 2018 Colorado restraining order, which is a “foreign protection order” under family Code § 6401, subd. (1) and (4) and therefore, the Los Angeles County Superior court was REQUIRED to sign an order registering the Colorado order in California once it was presented with a form request to do so by Cohen’s attorney Michelle Rice on Judicial Council form DV-600. (See Family Code § 6404, subd. (a) “(a) Any foreign protection order shall, upon request of the person in possession of the order, be registered with a court of this state in order to be entered in the Domestic Violence Restraining Order System …”.].)

As stated by the California Court of appeal in a case that I prosecuted in the trial court, and in the court of appeal pro bono:

“We begin by noting that when construing a statute, a court's duty is “ ‘simply to ascertain and declare what is in terms or in substance contained therein, not to insert what has been omitted, or to omit what has been inserted’ ”  (McAlexander v. Siskiyou Joint Community College (1990) 222 Cal.App.3d 768, 775, 272 Cal.Rptr. 70 (McAlexander).)   If there is no ambiguity about the meaning of the language, we must apply the provision according to its  terms without further judicial construction.   When the language is clear on its face, we may not consider extrinsic evidence to determine the intent of the Legislature.   If the language is clear, we follow that plain meaning.  (Wilson v. Safeway Stores, Inc. (1997) 52 Cal.App.4th 267, 271-272, 60 Cal.Rptr.2d 532 (Wilson ).).”
(In re Marriage of Dupre (2005) 127 Cal.App.4th 1517, 1519; bold italics added for emphasis.)

Family Code § 6401 clearly and unambiguously includes a civil harassment restraining order issued by a court of another state in its definition of “protection order”. §6404, subd. (a) clearly and unambiguously makes the registration of “any protection order” with a court of this state mandatory for indexing with “the Domestic Violence Restraining Order System” by its use of the word “shall”.

Therefore, unless and until you can produce a published California appellate decision that holds that a civil harassment restraining order issued by another state may not be entered in the Domestic Violence Restraining Order System (CLETS), there is no “motion to vacate” the May 25, 2011 registration of the Colorado order.

I have performed a diligent on-line search for such a published California appellate decision, and it does not exist – which is unsurprising given the unambiguous wording the California statute and in light of the fact that California civil harassment orders are also registered with CLETS. (See Judicial Council form CH-130 (CLETS-CHO) linked here )

You have not filed a motion to vacate the California registration of the Colorado order, and any such motion would be utterly and completely frivolous and without merit.

Moreover, you were criminally charged with violating the 2008 Colorado protection order registered in California in 2012. You did not raise the contention that the Colorado order was improperly entered into the Domestic Violence Restraining Order System prior to the commencement of your trial, during trial, in your direct appeal from your April 17, 2012 criminal conviction of multiple violations of that order and related sentence, protection orders, and fines, nor did you raise that issue in your petition for writ of habeas corpus seeking to overturn your conviction on various additional grounds.

Under the totality of these circumstances, any motion filed by you NOW, four years after the registration of the Colorado order in California and three years after your criminal conviction for willfully violating it, could only be regarded as an act of bad faith solely motivated by a desire to harass.

You are free to email me night and day with your warped and self-serving legal views in support of your dramatic tale of woe, but if you do I can and will respond with a definitive, bullet-proof legal analysis conclusively demonstrating the falsity of your expressed views and alleged intentions.

I owe you at least that much after all of the kindness you have shown me.

Very truly yours,

Stephen R. Gianelli
Attorney-at-Law (ret.)

From: Kelley Lynch []
Sent: Friday, May 22, 2015 2:46 
àTo: Stephen Gianelli; *IRS.Commisioner; Washington Field; ASKDOJ; Division, Criminal; Doug.Davis; Dennis; MollyHale; nsapao; fsb; rbyucaipa; khuvane; blourd; Robert MacMillan; a; wennermedia; Hoffman, Rand; Mick Brown; woodwardb; glenn.greenwald; lrohter; Harriet Ryan; hailey.branson; stan.garnett;; Feedback;; mayor.garcetti; Kelly.Sopko;
Subject: Fwd:

Stephen Gianelli,

Stop writing me and stop harassing me.  I addressed Von Watteville's slanderous and fraudulent statements about me.

àDon't contact me again.  I have your other harassing email about Cohen's fraud domestic violence order.  Michelle Rice, the attorney of record, can respond to my motion to vacate.  

Kelley Lynch