Leonard Cohen's Indecent Exposure, Obscene Conduct, Etc.

From: Kelley Lynch <kelley.lynch.2010@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, Apr 15, 2013 at 9:27 AM
Subject: Indecent Exposure
To: "Francisco.A.Suarez" <Francisco.A.Suarez@verizon.net>, 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,

At issue during my trial was the fact that Cohen exposed his penis to me.  I view that as sexual harassment and found the City Attorney's response appalling.  Here's their logic - it's okay for Cohen to expose his penis to me - which is indecent exposure - but I cannot speak about that.

Leonard Cohen finds his conduct annoying.  He has stolen from me.  We've discussed the evidence and concealment of that.  He lies about Phil Spector.  They concealed the fact that Mick Brown advised me about Cohen's statements/testimony before the Grand Jury and I can easily read Phil Spector prosecution motions - online at LA Superior Court.  He definitely committed tax fraud and there's no neglience.  This man's obsession with not paying ordinary income taxes was unreal - as was his greed.  My public defenders had letters from Neal Greenberg warning Cohen that the IRS could overturn his entities with respect to issues involving self-dealing, etc.   Leonard Cohen has a history of drug abuse.  Leonard Cohen was accused - by Freda Guttman and Ann Diamond - of molesting his daughter.  He's aware  of all of this.  Here's a man obsessed with his press.  The prosecutor  raised my online comments and communications with journalists, I believe,as an issue.  Here's a question - if reality annoys Leonard Cohen is that my problem?  No.  It's not an element of the intent to annoy statute.  She made it appear that it was for the jurors.  I see right through this prosecutor.

I've sent you the article on this celebrity fraud justice, targeting innocent people, setting them up essentially, restraining order fraud (I wasn't served and that's obviously a huge legal issue - how did California obtain jurisdiction), misconduct on the part of the City Attorney, law enforcement, etc.  Should we also formally go to the Grand Jury?  Obviously the court system is involved with this and the article raised a good point - why do they only care about the welfare of celebrities?  I have been relentlessly targeted by Cohen's fans and this lunatic Gianelli.  I phoned the Oakland FBI and had a long conversation about this criminal harassment.  I view this as a very serious particularly as it relates to many people in my life.  And, the City Attorney permitted a man criminally harassing to copy her in on many, many emails.  She then went and lied to LAPD.  There was a disclaimer on there for the FBI.  It's an example of how they lie about threats. 

I'm working on the Writ of Habeas Corpus.  I called and left you a private message about one legal issue.  Thank you for assisting me with this.  I do wish the appellate division would let me abandon this appeal and do believe that's my constitutional right and I personally don't believe justice for me is in Los Angeles.  Therefore, when you review the Writ please make sure I've properly federalized matters.

Thank you very much.  Talk to you soon.

All the best,
Kelley

P.S.  Please see statute re. indecent exposure below.  It's a very serious matter.  What this man exposed me to is revolting.  He personally is obscene.  Imagine looking at people defecating on one another in the presence of your female personal manager.  And, I definitely told witnesses at the time and it alarmed me because I realized what my children could look at online.

888.327.4652 | 24/7 Sex Crimes Consultations

California "Indecent Exposure" Law

Penal Code 314 PC

inShar

California Penal Code 314 PC prohibits the sex crime of "indecent exposure" . . . which means willfully exposing your genitals to someone else, motivated by a desire to sexually gratify yourself or offend the other person.¹
California indecent exposure law is pretty broad and also vague...and can cover behavior that you might not have thought was criminal. If you are facing indecent exposure charges, you may be surprised and feel that your rights have been violated.
Interestingly, despite constant changes in what society considers "indecent," California's indecent exposure statute has remained virtually unchanged since its enactment in 1872.²
Here are some examples of behavior that can lead to California indecent exposure charges:

• A female baring her breasts in a crowded restaurant in order to sexually gratify her boyfriend;



• An adult male standing on a street corner "flashing" his genitals to females who walk by for sexual gratification purposes; and



• A teenage boy exposing his genitals to elderly women walking out of a church with the goal of offending them.

Penalties

While a California "indecent exposure" conviction may not seem like a very serious offense, the repercussions can be devastating.

In most cases, a first indecent exposure conviction subjects you to misdemeanor penalties of up to six (6) months in county jail and a fine of up to one thousand dollars ($1,000).³ A second offense is a felony and can lead to a California state prison sentence.⁴

But perhaps worst of all...any Penal Code 314 PC conviction subjects you to a lifetime duty to register as a register as a California sex offender .⁵

--

Question: How can you tell the difference between an attorney lying dead in the road and a coyote lying dead in the road? 
Answer: With the coyote, you usually see skid marks.