Friday, June 19, 2015

Kelley Lynch's Email to IRS, FBI, DOJ, & Leonard Cohen's Lawyers - Re. False Accusations, Witness Limited Powers of Attorney & Criminal Witness Tampering

From: Kelley Lynch <>
Date: Fri, Jun 19, 2015 at 11:08 AM
Subject: Re:
To: Dan Bergman <>, Michelle Rice <>, "*IRS.Commisioner" <*>, Washington Field <>, ASKDOJ <>, "Division, Criminal" <>, "Doug.Davis" <>, Dennis <>, MollyHale <>, nsapao <>, fsb <>, rbyucaipa <>, khuvane <>, blourd <>, Robert MacMillan <>, a <>, wennermedia <>, Mick Brown <>, "glenn.greenwald" <>, Harriet Ryan <>, "hailey.branson" <>, "stan.garnett" <>,, "mayor.garcetti" <>,, "Kelly.Sopko" <>,,

Hi IRS, FBI, and DOJ,

As you know, every witness who wrote Judge Hess provided me with a limited power of attorney.  No one has to explain why.  These people are insane.  I think Judge Hess should phone the witnesses and also speak to them about the criminal witness tampering.  What type of sentence does that bring?  20 years.  I think this federal statute applies.  I'll have my witnesses address this with federal court.

(b) Whoever knowingly uses intimidation, threatens, or corruptly persuades another person, or attempts to do so, or engages in misleading conduct toward another person, with intent to—
(1) influence, delay, or prevent the testimony of any person in an official proceeding;
(2) cause or induce any person to—
(A) withhold testimony, or withhold a record, document, or other object, from an official proceeding;
(B) alter, destroy, mutilate, or conceal an object with intent to impair the object’s integrity or availability for use in an official proceeding;
(C) evade legal process summoning that person to appear as a witness, or to produce a record, document, or other object, in an official proceeding; or
(D) be absent from an official proceeding to which such person has been summoned by legal process; or
(3) hinder, delay, or prevent the communication to a law enforcement officer or judge of the United States of information relating to the commission or possible commission of a Federal offense or a violation of conditions of probation  [1] supervised release,, [1] parole, or release pending judicial proceedings;
shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 20 years, or both.


On Fri, Jun 19, 2015 at 11:05 AM, Kelley Lynch <> wrote:

Daniel Bergman and Michelle Rice,

The Proxy Lawyer has decided to publicly lie about me, threaten me with criminal statutes, and defend Leonard Cohen.  Therefore, I believe it's appropriate to address these issues with the attorneys of record in Case No. BC338322.  Is it your position that I do not have limited powers of attorney from Rutger Penick, Clea Surkhang, Palden Ronge, and Dan Meade?  What evidence would you have to support this frivolous argument made in bad faith to further discredit me?  You would have none whatsoever.  Did my witnesses lie when they asked Judge Hess to phone them?  

I didn't file a motion to reconsider so I have no idea what that argument is about.  I do understand that Gianelli/Mongochili is an official member of Cohen's legal team.  What's the penalty for a Complaint that is nothing other than a fabricated narrative and fraud submitted to IRS - to file Cohen's 2005 tax returns; amend his 2004 and 2003 returns; and obtain fraudulent tax refunds?  Is there a penalty for that?

That's your evidence?  The font?  Well, why doesn't Judge Hess call them and cut to the chase rather than wasting taxpayer dollars?  Every one of these witnesses was willing to testify at the January 17, 2014 hearing.  

All witnesses signed limited powers of attorney.  Is that it now?  All my witnesses gave me a blank check?  I wasn't served Cohen's lawsuit.  

Do jurors tend to disbelieve me?  Well, the jurors told my lawyers that they wanted to hear from IRS; relied on the prosecutors lies about TH assets; and, my lawyer felt there was a prosecution plant on the jury.  He also advised me of this:  the City Attorney is attempting to sabotage IRS; discredit you; and the DA doesn't want the Spector verdict overturned.  He personally phoned Bruce Cutler who didn't write the judge that my lawyer harassed him.  I don't think Phil Spector would agree with Bruce Cutler over this issue and I did hear from him personally following the trial.  

I didn't sign the declarations.  I conformed the signatures based on the limited powers of attorney.  Will I be prosecuted for that?  Why?  Doesn't California recognize limited powers of attorney - under the oath the of perjury per California law?  I find that impossible to believe.

I won't be withdrawing my motion.  I will be submitting your Motion for Sanctions to Tax Court and affixing it to my RICO lawsuit.  Leonard Cohen, a Canadian, wants to terminate my fee waiver after bankrupting me and stealing from me, etc.?  

Kelley Lynch

Kelley Lynch has now posted her reply to Cohen's opposition to motion to reconsider her 2013 motion to vacate the 2006 default judgment.

A couple of interesting observations.

We note that Lynch does not claim to have "limited powers of attorney" from her witnesses/declarants (whose names she signed to their declarations) UNDER OATH in her reply declaration. She only makes that claim in her legal brief.

Lynch tries to authenticate the "original" signature pages for her witness declarations with "letters" that claim to be from the witnesses, which letters are all identically formatted, bear the same type font, and were obviously all prepared by Lynch herself and are not under oath.

Rutger Penick's "letter" says he gave his mother a "limited power of attorney" to sign his declaration for him because he was (allegedly) unavailable to sign the declaration himself. (This claim is repeated in all of the witness letters.)

Unexplained is how he was "available" to sign a power of attorney but not his declaration.

And all of the witnesses were "unavailable" to sign their declarations but WERE AVAIALBLE to sign a "power of attorney"?

And they were all willing to give Lynch what amounts to a blank check to write whatever she wanted in "their" declarations and to sign their names to it?

And Lynch wonders why juries tend to disbelieve her?

Lynch also seems oblivious to the law relating to a valid declaration.

A declaration must be “subscribed” by the declarant. (Code Civ. Pro. sec. 2015.5.) "Subscribe" means "to sign with one's own hand." (People v. Pierce (1967) 66 Cal.2d 53, 59, fn. 5.) "The oath or declaration must be in such form that criminal sanctions of perjury might apply where material facts so declared to be true, are in fact not true or are not known to be true." (Ancora-Citronelle Corp. v. Green (1974) 41 Cal.App.3d 146, 150.)

Clearly, then, a declaration signed by a person other than the declarant is useless as evidence. Moreover, if the fraudulent signature is affixed to the declaration with the intent to deceive a court regarding the signature’s authenticity (whereas the declaration is unaccompanied with an appropriate disclaimer), the person who affixed the fraudulent signature is potentially exposed to a charge of violating Penal Code sec. 134 [fabricating evidence for submission to the court], a FELONY punishable by up to THREE YEARS in the state prison. (Ibid; also see Penal Code sec. 132 [offering forged evidence to a court.].)

Subsequently lying about it (or any material matter) is a five-year state prison felony under Penal Code sec. 118.