Wednesday, September 23, 2015

Kelley Lynch's Email to IRS Chief Trial Counsel's Office Re. Leonard Cohen, the Ongoing Criminal Harassment, An Obvious Legal Conspiracy, & the Targeting Of Her Sons & Others

From: Kelley Lynch <>
Date: Wed, Sep 23, 2015 at 12:48 AM
Subject: The Ongoing Criminal Harassment: Attempts To Elicit Information: Obsession With My Son, Etc.
To:, "*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 <>, Mike Feuer <>, "mayor.garcetti" <>, Opla-pd-los-occ <>, "Kelly.Sopko" <>, Whistleblower <>, Attacheottawa <>,
Cc: Michelle Rice <>, STEPHEN GIANELLI <>

Mr. Fabian,

I would like to ask you to review the harassing emails I continue to receive from Stephen Gianelli.  I do not know this individual and has has not entered a formal appearance on behalf of Leonard Cohen.  I, for one, am not falling for the moronic cover-your-ass campaign that involves absolutely crass emails between Rice and Gianelli.  I have advised both of these individuals to cease and desist.

As you know, I have three hearings on October 6, 2015 related to Leonard Cohen's illegal default judgment and attempt to extort $14 million from me.  I have submitted substantial evidence to LA Superior Court and the perjury, fraud, and contradictory statements are excessive, outrageous, and inconceivable.  In any event, once these hearings are held, I will move onto federal court.  The wrongful sealing of evidence (including publicly available documents) and the Court's denial of my motion re. fraud upon the court are under appeal.  I intend to file a notice of appeal with respect to the fraudulent domestic violence order.  Restraining orders are simply a tactic Leonard Cohen and his representatives have employed and the Colorado order was issued without findings.

I am well aware of the fact that opposing counsel failed to have the Court sign an Order following the January 2014 hearing.  I have documented that matter for IRS, FBI, DOJ, and others.  Gianelli's attempts to appear "helpful" are merely an attempt to elicit information.  Rice has actively encouraged this criminal to provoke and incite me and targeting my sons appears to have been their preferred method.  

I believe that Michelle Rice has spent the past 10 years targeting me, lying about me, and doing anything it takes for her client.  She evidently is also into cash.  

However, the point I want to bring to your attention is this criminal's obsession with my son, Rutger.  Leonard Cohen sent me an email in 2011 wherein he stated that he saw "Rutger" copied in.  That email was not presented as evidence during my trial although the subject line (that interested my "prosecutor") clearly stated 2004 and 2005 federal tax matters or something to that effect.  That is due to the fact that in September 2004, the FTB advised me to go get the tax information Cohen is obligated and required to provide me.  He steadfastly refuses to provide this information to me and believes he has a legal right to subvert IRS filing and reporting requirements.  Does Rutger think I'm smart?  That line is meant to upset and provoke me.  These people belong in prison.  I am very clear about that fact.  One of Gianelli's roles involves criminally harassing, threatening, insulting, stalking, slandering, and intimidating witnesses.  People have contacted law enforcement, attorneys, submitted declarations, etc.  Noting deters this criminal.  

I have forwarded you the documents Cohen has now filed in response to my Motion to vacate the Renewal of Judgment and Motion to Tax Costs.  The fraud in those documents is extensive.  Some of these issues relate to the matter before Tax Court.  They're all intertwined because this situation with Leonard Cohen is nothing other than a criminal tax fraud matter and attempt to obstruct justice.  That would explain the lengths this unconscionable man has gone to destroy my life, lie throughout every legal proceeding, and target my sons and others.  I would like you to be clear about the fact that I believe Leonard Cohen and his lawyers are capable of just about anything.  

All the best,

From: Stephen R. Gianelli <>
Date: Tue, Sep 22, 2015 at 8:51 PM
Subject: RE: Kelley Lynch vs. Leonard Cohen, et al. (RICO)
To: Kelley Lynch <>

Clearly, Ms. Lynch, your obsessive desire to “prove” a “conspiracy” to “harass” you is more important to you than defeating the 10-year renewal of the 2006 judgment on October 6.

Nor do you have anything to say about THESE FACTS, emailed to you hours ago:

You did not “raise the FACT that the order was not filed.” And the point isn’t even entirely that an order was never filed. The point is that an order denying the 2013 motion to vacate was NEITHER signed NOR filed, AND THAT THE MINUTE ORDER DIRECTS THAT A WRITTEN ORDER BE PREPARED. Those things TAKEN TOGETHER have the legal significance of meaning that NO FINAL, APPEALABLE ORDER WAS ENTERED AND – THEREFORE, RES JUDICATA (SOMETIMES CALLED “ISSUE PRECLUSION) DOES NOT APPLY.

Here is what you said at the hearing per the transcript:

“I still don’t know if your order was entered. […] He said he would serve me; I never received anything. I don’t even know if an order was filed. It’s not on L.A. Superior Court’s website. And he refused to serve me anything, which is pretty fascinating.” (TR 6/23/2015, p. 8, lines 2-11, emphasis added.)

I have now solved the mystery  for you. There is no “If” or “maybe”. Korn (or more probably Rice, since she was doing all the work and Korn was attorney of record in name only) attached the proposed order to a “Notice of Lodging” (the proposed order) and then filed that with the court, instead of transmitting a proposed order directly to Judge Hess or his clerk and then following up every week or so to make sure that the order was signed AND filed. As a consequence of this professional negligence, NO ORDER SETTING FORTH THE COURT’S RULING ON JANUARY 17, 2014 WAS EVER FILED. And it has the legal significance that I stated in my emails.

If you knew all of that you would have said “No, Judge Hess, no order was ever signed or filed, and under In re Marriage of Lechowick (1998) 65 Cal.App.4th 1406, 1410, there is no final, appealable order – so no, Judge I did not have the choice of appealing the order or letting it go as you say and in addition judge, the lack of a final, appealable order also means that there never was a final, binding determination that I was served in a manner authorized by statute. Nor did your January 17, 2014 ruling rest on the fact of service judge, because my declaration  was unsigned and you relied on procedural grounds and the lack of due diligence in denying the motion. You never made a factual finding that I was served with process in August of 2005.”

But you said NONE of that at the June 23, 2015 hearing.

So I assume that you DID NOT know those things.

And, you’re welcome BTW.

And you honestly believe that MICHELLE RICE would be a part of bringing these (and other) facts and authorities to your attention on the eve of a hearing to decide whether or not her celebrity client Leonard Cohen’s $14M judgment goes poof  and disappears) per your pending motion? And that she would risk that to rebut a “conspiracy” that you cannot prove and that isn’t even before the court?

Why Rutger thinks you are “smart” is a mystery. Because for a “smart” person you are the most obtuse person I have ever encountered. You don’t even see a point when you trip over it.

Very truly yours,

Stephen R. Gianelli
Attorney-at-Law (ret.)
Crete, Greece

From: Kelley Lynch []
Sent: Tuesday, September 22, 2015 10:14 PM
To: Michelle Rice; STEPHEN GIANELLI; *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; Mike Feuer; mayor.garcetti; Opla-pd-los-occ; Whistleblower; Attacheottawa;
Subject: Kelley Lynch vs. Leonard Cohen, et al. (RICO)

Michelle Rice and Stephen Gianelli,

I view this ongoing harassment, in great part, as your Cover Your Ass Operation.  I am aware of the legal issues the Criminal Stalker (Gianelli) is harassing me over.  I raised this issue with Hess at the June 2015 hearing.  The transcript is evidence of that fact.

Cease and desist.

Kelley Lynch

From: Stephen Gianelli <>
Date: Tue, Sep 22, 2015 at 6:44 AM
Subject: Pending motion
To: Kelley Lynch <>
Ms. Lynch,

Don't be so obtuse.

Your pending motion to vacate will not turn on "the existence of a legal conspiracy".

You already knew that Judge Hess never SIGNED a written order that he directed in the 1/17/2014 minute order, AND that fact means there was no prior determination off service in this case?

Fine. But I don't think so. 

You already knew that a minute order that directs the preparation of a written order is NOT a final, appealable order? Again, I don't think so. 

This area of the law is complex and some lawyers and judges don't even understand it. I learned these things the hard way, by having an appeal dismissed and working like hell to get it reinstated. 

Try to keep your eye on the ball.

You may not think I am trying to "help" you but I assure you MR feels differently. And she is seething. 

Just read the pinpoint materials I sent you and consider my bullet points and then do what you have to do.  

Sent from my BlackBerry 10 smartphone.

From: Stephen R. Gianelli <>
Date: Tue, Sep 22, 2015 at 6:25 AM
One final point re the argument that service has “already been litigated”.

I have already given you the authority for the fact that because no final appealable order was signed there is no res judicata.

In addition, Judge Hess refused to consider your moving declaration at the January 17, 2014 hearing because it was unsigned. Therefore, the motion was denied for reasons OTHER than whether you were served.

From: Stephen R. Gianelli <>
Date: Tue, Sep 22, 2015 at 3:40 AM
California law is settled that pending appeal a trial court judgment is not final and will not be given res judicata effect (Code Civ. Proc.§ 1049). It therefore follows that an unsigned minute order that is not yet appealable because it directs a written order that has not yet been signed will not be given res judicata effect either. (See Restatement (Second) of Judgments § 13, comment b (the "finality" requirement for purposes of claim preclusion resembles the concept of finality for purposes of appellate review).

Therefore, there is no res judicata as to the January 17, 2014 ruling.

From: Stephen R. Gianelli <>
Date: Mon, Sep 21, 2015 at 11:12 PM
Subject: Pending motion to vacate; reply memorandum
Ms. Lynch,

The minute order issued by Judge Hess on January 17, 2014 expressly directs the preparation of a written order. (See attached minute order stating, in relevant part: “Plaintiff is to submit an order”.)

As such it was not an appealable orderIn re Marriage of Lechowick (1998) 65 Cal.App.4th 1406, 1410 [minute order that directs preparation of written order not final, appealable order]; in accord In re Marriage of Dupre (2005) 127 Cal.App.4th 1517  (rev. denied 7/13/05) (citing Lechowick on this point.)

Plaintiff’s counsel prepared a proposed written order as directed, but instead of submitting the proposed order to Judge Hess’ chambers for signature, and then following up to insure that it had been signed, filed and entered, and then serving you with a notice of entry of same – counsel simply attached the proposed order to a pleading styled “Notice of Lodging Court Order…” and FILED it, where is sat (and sits) through today. (See attached, endorsed filed “Notice of Lodging Court Order…”. Therefore, whoever was “lead counsel” in the matter committed a serious procedural error by not making sure that the order was submitted to Judge Hess for signature and by not following up periodically to insure its entry.
Because you COULD NOT have appealed the January 17 minute order as Judge Hess stated on June 23, 2015, and the minute order – that directs the preparation of a written order – is neither final nor binding. (See attached transcript, page 3 lines 26-28.)

Very truly yours,

Stephen R. Gianelli
Attorney-at-Law (ret.)
Crete, Greece