Friday, March 1, 2013

These People Wouldn't Know Good Faith If They Fell Over It


From: Kelley Lynch <kelley.lynch.2010@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, Mar 1, 2013 at 1:44 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>


Hello,

I didn't fail to show anything.  I have no guilt.  I've done nothing wrong.  I am just dealing with unbelievable liars.  As I said to Detective Viramontes/LAPD (who was kind enough to speak to me honestly and professionally) - why didn't he just hand over the information.  Why did he steal from me?  I have no idea what the jury thought.  I know what lawyers think - this is a travesty; it involves corruption; I've been targeted and was retaliated over the appeal; Cohen committed criminal tax fraud; the IRS needs to investigate and prosecute many people; and the record is a mess - the perjury is overwhelming.  And then there's the plea deal I wasn't told about.  I was precluded from putting on a defense.  But this group of people in LA have really proven how corrupt they are.  That's the good news.  The great enlightened Buddha writing this document knows how the outcome would have been.  My Tibetan lama friends know this - stay away from Los Angeles.  You have been targeted by corrupt politicians and corrupt law enforcement.  Just write the book.  Don't involve yourself in this appeal.  It's not good for me.  I have health issues now.  And, this is an IRS matter and Cohen's testimony about Phillip is now on the record, as are three versions of the Phil Spector gun story.  It's really sickening to read liars covering for other liars.  There's something quite porn-like about it.  And then there's the ghetto legalese.  I thought I did an excellent job with my Opening Brief.  Fortunately, I won't have to read their response.  It just needed to be edited.  Maybe they would like a string section as well.  In any event, as my lawyers and I discussed, the FBI should walk in, cuff a lot of people, and they need to be prosecuted.  If they have to talk to these liars, they have sympathies.

All the best,
Kelley

Even if the court’s ruling was erroneous, apellant has failed to show the required prejudice.  More importantly, the evidence proving appellant’s guilt was overwhelming; the sheer number of contacts - voice mail and email - which the jury heard and had the opportunity to read - in the time frame, their tone and content, was more than sufficient  to support the jury finding the contacts were neither in good faith nor in the ordinary course and scope of business.  Where, as here, a defendant is precluded from presenting only certain evidence concerning a defense, rather than an entire defense, reversal is required only if it is reasonably probable that, absent the error, the defense would have achieved a more favorable outcome.  People v. Bradford (1997) 15 Ca.4th 1229, 1325; People v. Watson (1956) 46 Cal.2d 818, 836.  See also Evid. Code section 354.



--
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.”