Kelley's Email To Steven Machat - About Gianelli's Lies Re. My Witnesses ... Steven Machat, For Instance

From: Kelley Lynch <kelley.lynch.2010@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, Mar 23, 2013 at 10:29 AM
Subject:
To: Steven Machat <smachat@gmail.com>, Dennis <Dennis@riordan-horgan.com>, "*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>, "Francisco.A.Suarez" <Francisco.A.Suarez@verizon.net>


Steven,

This man, Stephen Gianelli, has relentlessly targeted me, my family, and others since hearing from Cohen's lawyers in 2009.  He and Michelle Blaine (a woman who was found guilty of stealing approximately $900,000 from Phil Spector) conspired to target my email accounts and blogs - addressing the factual situation with Leonard Cohen.  I have posted a public quote of his below.  He is engaged in an outrageous ad hominem attack on my character.  Why do you think he and my trial lawyer (who outrageous spoke to this man about my witnesses and what they could or could not corroborate) would lie about the fact that you were willing to fly across the country, on your own dime, and take the stand for me but then had a conflict in your schedule?  Leonard Cohen has stolen your and your father's share of intellectual property so that establishes a pattern on Cohen's part.  Cohen also withheld commissions due Machat & Machat and he has done the same to me.  In any event, you could corroborate quite a lot of things.  

For instance, you could have addressed Michelle Rice's fraudulent letter to me advising me that Cohen registered his fraudulent domestic violence order (that was originally a civil harassment order I requested and it can only be modified by the Boulder court) in California on or before February 14, 2011.  Attached to my response to Rice (which you were copied in on) was a transcript of our conversation (that you reviewed) which the prosecutor concealed.  I reviewed the PD notes in the file with you not that long ago - it states that you advised them that Cohen uses corporations to evade paying taxes.  That's correct and that's why he's in the situation he is with respect to his tax fraud.  You discussed other matters with my PD as well.  

You and I also discussed the fact that Streeter raised, on the record, a letter sent to Carter/Irving Trust that helps prove Cohen defrauded you and your father of your 15% share of intellectual property that was assigned to Stranger Music, Inc.  I think it's extremely relevant and legitimate to address the fact that Cohen concealed this fact from me (and possibly others) when he sold Stranger Music's stock to Sony/ATV.  Why did the prosecutor want to attack that, Steven?  Any thoughts?  The prosecutor views anything factual as irrelevant.  She met a celebrity, appeared intent on sabotaging me and the IRS, and she introduced Phil Spector into my intent to annoy the fraud thief known as Leonard Cohen.  She doesn't like that definition of Cohen.  But, Steven, we know this is simply truthful.  

The fact that my trial lawyer breached a/c privilege and spoke to a man aligned with Cohen is shocking.  It shocked the public defender's office.  But Gianelli - a lawyer with motive here - thinks conduct that may be illegal or criminal is perfectly acceptable.  In fact, he's trying to argue that Jane Doe is not the actual name of the individual who did not live with me and wasn't served Cohen's complaint.  I don't care what the woman's name was, Steven.  She didn't live with me and I wasn't served Cohen's complaint, the proof of service is fraudulent (I had no female co-habitant), and I wasn't served or notified of the default judgment.  Te default is void but evidence of theft and wrongfully altered my tax returns as you and I discussed.  I agree - its a very serious legal issue.  

All the best,

Kelley

3. That the PD's office called all of the potential witnesses you provided them with, and that your lawyers were unable to corroborate ANY of your claims. That is why no defense witnesses were called to the stand (except you).