From: Kelley Lynch <kelley.lynch.2010@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, Mar 1, 2013 at 2:56 PM
Subject: Re: Section F - Appeal Brief - Agent Tejeda
To: "*irs. commissioner" <*IRS.Commissioner@irs.gov>, Washington Field <washington.field@ic.fbi.gov>, ASKDOJ <ASKDOJ@usdoj.gov>, "Kelly.Sopko" <Kelly.Sopko@tigta.treas.gov>, "Doug.Davis" <Doug.Davis@ftb.ca.gov>, Dennis <Dennis@riordan-horgan.com>
Hi,
The City Attorney's office is addressing how my appellate attorney feels about this matter with respect to Phil Spector. I have nothing to say publicly about it. They are concealing an email that impeaches Cohen's testimony about Phil Spector. Nothing about this misconduct - which is far more severe than has been addressed - is reversible. I believe in karma and this is permanent. I don't care either. I saw right through Streeter and asked Viramontes/LAPD if he thought she has serious psychiatric problems. That's my view. I can't imagine why the taxpayer's are paying for her. But she won with her retaliation - I don't want to be targeted or threatened and refuse to continue with this appeal although it is my legal right.
The prosecutor accused me of theft. Meanwhile, she was gushing about a celebrity thief and fraud. Fortunately, the IRS and others have the evidence. I don't have much to say. Mick Brown told me he testified and it turned out to be statements before the Grand Jury. Statements in England are testimony. There was some confusion. In any event, LA Superior Court now has three versions of Cohen's embellished gun stories about Phil Spector. The City Attorney is concealing one. That is revolting.
I have no idea what the City Attorney wants or doesn't want for Phil Spector and I don't care. He doesn't me. He doesn't know Phil. He has lying prosecutors who will conceal evidence, commit perjury, present fraud to jurors, and run around impressed with celebrity while they're whining that they have a budget crisis. Maybe he escaped from Roswell. I have no idea. I don't care.
I think they should address Francisco's views on what has happened here - that I was railroaded over Phil Spector and this is an IRS tax matter involving Leonard Cohen. That's how everyone feels. They can remain delusional. That's not my problem. Next section is a garbage my lawyer didn't object at trial. I'm not typing that. Then, appellant failed to set forth alleged errors for meaningful review. I don't believe there would have been a meaningful review and the notion is laughable. There's a lot more on prosecutorial misconduct but I've addressed it in reality. She can lie to judges, conceal evidence, elicit perjured testimony. The prosecutor's assertion that I misappropriated money which is a BALD FACED LIE is in closing arguments. They can't read the transcript? Nothing a prosecutor says is evidence but one juror relied on Streeter's assertion that Cohen only had $100-150K in assets left. I have no idea what bank account she was talking about.
The entire trial was infected with corruption. It's ugly up close and personal. That's it for this document. I want to address the lies in the opening Statement of Facts and then this should be thrown in the trash can. That's where it belongs. The taxpayers should be livid.
H. Appellant Failed To Establish The Prosecution Engaged In Misconduct That Violated Her Due Process And Fair Trial Rights
Appellant contents the prosecutor committed reversible misconduct. Appellant asserts “the prosecution alluded to the fact that Ms. Lynch apparently stole money from Mr. Cohen … this was not “true” and there was mention that Mr. Cohen had lied about … Phil Spector to the grand jury … the Prosecutor’s Office who … Attorney Streeter Works for have a vested interest in making sure … the prosecution of … Spector remains intact … Ms. Lynch is being unlawfully prosecuted.” AOB 14 Appellant provides no citations to the record in support of these vague claims. Appellant then asserts the Los Angeles City Attorney’s office should have “recused itself instead of attempting to silence the truth.” AOB 15 None of appellant’s contentions support a claim of prosecutor misconduct. Further, appellant’s failure at trial to request an admonition OR some other curative action by the court forfeits the issue on appeal.
Date: Fri, Mar 1, 2013 at 2:56 PM
Subject: Re: Section F - Appeal Brief - Agent Tejeda
To: "*irs. commissioner" <*IRS.Commissioner@irs.gov>, Washington Field <washington.field@ic.fbi.gov>, ASKDOJ <ASKDOJ@usdoj.gov>, "Kelly.Sopko" <Kelly.Sopko@tigta.treas.gov>, "Doug.Davis" <Doug.Davis@ftb.ca.gov>, Dennis <Dennis@riordan-horgan.com>
Hi,
The City Attorney's office is addressing how my appellate attorney feels about this matter with respect to Phil Spector. I have nothing to say publicly about it. They are concealing an email that impeaches Cohen's testimony about Phil Spector. Nothing about this misconduct - which is far more severe than has been addressed - is reversible. I believe in karma and this is permanent. I don't care either. I saw right through Streeter and asked Viramontes/LAPD if he thought she has serious psychiatric problems. That's my view. I can't imagine why the taxpayer's are paying for her. But she won with her retaliation - I don't want to be targeted or threatened and refuse to continue with this appeal although it is my legal right.
The prosecutor accused me of theft. Meanwhile, she was gushing about a celebrity thief and fraud. Fortunately, the IRS and others have the evidence. I don't have much to say. Mick Brown told me he testified and it turned out to be statements before the Grand Jury. Statements in England are testimony. There was some confusion. In any event, LA Superior Court now has three versions of Cohen's embellished gun stories about Phil Spector. The City Attorney is concealing one. That is revolting.
I have no idea what the City Attorney wants or doesn't want for Phil Spector and I don't care. He doesn't me. He doesn't know Phil. He has lying prosecutors who will conceal evidence, commit perjury, present fraud to jurors, and run around impressed with celebrity while they're whining that they have a budget crisis. Maybe he escaped from Roswell. I have no idea. I don't care.
I think they should address Francisco's views on what has happened here - that I was railroaded over Phil Spector and this is an IRS tax matter involving Leonard Cohen. That's how everyone feels. They can remain delusional. That's not my problem. Next section is a garbage my lawyer didn't object at trial. I'm not typing that. Then, appellant failed to set forth alleged errors for meaningful review. I don't believe there would have been a meaningful review and the notion is laughable. There's a lot more on prosecutorial misconduct but I've addressed it in reality. She can lie to judges, conceal evidence, elicit perjured testimony. The prosecutor's assertion that I misappropriated money which is a BALD FACED LIE is in closing arguments. They can't read the transcript? Nothing a prosecutor says is evidence but one juror relied on Streeter's assertion that Cohen only had $100-150K in assets left. I have no idea what bank account she was talking about.
The entire trial was infected with corruption. It's ugly up close and personal. That's it for this document. I want to address the lies in the opening Statement of Facts and then this should be thrown in the trash can. That's where it belongs. The taxpayers should be livid.
H. Appellant Failed To Establish The Prosecution Engaged In Misconduct That Violated Her Due Process And Fair Trial Rights
Appellant contents the prosecutor committed reversible misconduct. Appellant asserts “the prosecution alluded to the fact that Ms. Lynch apparently stole money from Mr. Cohen … this was not “true” and there was mention that Mr. Cohen had lied about … Phil Spector to the grand jury … the Prosecutor’s Office who … Attorney Streeter Works for have a vested interest in making sure … the prosecution of … Spector remains intact … Ms. Lynch is being unlawfully prosecuted.” AOB 14 Appellant provides no citations to the record in support of these vague claims. Appellant then asserts the Los Angeles City Attorney’s office should have “recused itself instead of attempting to silence the truth.” AOB 15 None of appellant’s contentions support a claim of prosecutor misconduct. Further, appellant’s failure at trial to request an admonition OR some other curative action by the court forfeits the issue on appeal.
--
The
Judge admonished the witness, “Do you understand that you have sworn to
tell the truth?” “I do.” “Do you understand what will happen if you are
not truthful?” “Sure,” said the witness. “My side will win.”