Leonard Cohen's Interchangeable Lies

From: Kelley Lynch <kelley.lynch.2013@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, Apr 26, 2015 at 9:09 AM
Subject: 
To: "irs.commissioner" <irs.commissioner@irs.gov>, Washington Field <washington.field@ic.fbi.gov>, "Division, Criminal" <Criminal.Division@usdoj.gov>, "Doug.Davis" <Doug.Davis@ftb.ca.gov>, Dennis <Dennis@riordan-horgan.com>, MollyHale <MollyHale@ucia.gov>, nsapao <nsapao@nsa.gov>, fsb <fsb@fsb.ru>, rbyucaipa <rbyucaipa@yahoo.com>, khuvane <khuvane@caa.com>, blourd <blourd@caa.com>, Robert MacMillan <robert.macmillan@gmail.com>, a <anderson.cooper@cnn.com>, wennermedia <wennermedia@gmail.com>, Mick Brown <mick.brown@telegraph.co.uk>, "glenn.greenwald" <glenn.greenwald@firstlook.org>, lrohter <lrohter@nytimes.com>, Harriet Ryan <harriet.ryan@latimes.com>, "hailey.branson" <hailey.branson@latimes.com>, "stan.garnett" <stan.garnett@gmail.com>, mike.feuer@lacity.org, "mayor.garcetti" <mayor.garcetti@lacity.org>

Hi IRS, FBI, and DOJ,

Stephen Gianelli, who has stalked and harassed me and others for approximately six straight years now, certainly does seem to be part of Cohen's defense team - while possibly moonlighting for the Spector prosecution.  

I never made any allegation that Cohen molested his daughter.  I am sitting here with a legal opinion on the matter and Cohen was quite clear at that time - the issue related to Freda Guttman's informing Ann Diamond that her daughter was present when Lorca Cohen made these statements.  In any event, this situation has nothing to do with me.  I suppose the City Attorney's office thoroughly investigate it and is ready to defend Leonard Cohen.  This video does give one a moment of pause however.  I posted nothing gleefully or maliciously. 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-6B2E337aDc

The Criminal Stalker has raised Cohen's three versions of the Phil Spector gun story now before LA Superior Court.  It this issue was not material, but rather irrelevant, why did the prosecutor initially elicit testimony about Cohen and the Phil Spector gun story.  My lawyers did not.  Why did the District Attorney, who prosecuted Spector, publicly align himself with Leonard Cohen in targeting me at the time of my so-called trial?  That's a far more relevant question.  My public defender cross-examined Cohen over issues he testified about which were elicited by the prosecutor.  They were interested in Spector and a gun.  That’s abundantly clear.

I didn’t falsely accuse Cohen of testifying before the Phil Spector Grand Jury.  Mick Brown, UK Telegraph, wrote me that he reviewed Cohen’s testimony/statements that were presented to the Grand Jury.  He also clarified this matter during and after my trial.  I have reviewed the legal documents submitted to the Court in the Phil Spector matter.  The prosecutors did indeed use a Leonard Cohen gun incident – semi-automatic to chest (absent the bottle of wine that’s normally present in this version).  That version is directly contradicted by Cohen’s testimony during my trial – automatic to the head.  The Criminal Stalker argues that semi-automatic and automatic are interchangeable.  They are distinct and Cohen was quite clear about the distinction between a revolver and an automatic.  He also had a devotion to armaments and this was addressed on one of his approved fan websites 

I never accused Leonard Cohen of being responsible for Rutger’s accident and the allegation is outrageous and blatantly false.  I didn’t accuse Cohen of molesting his daughter and he should speak to Lorca Cohen and Freda Guttman – or the City Attorney who evidently investigated the situation.  The letter I am in possession of (and other evidence) clearly states that this conduct is criminal in nature.  I didn’t say anything about Cohen and NAMBLA although the prosecutor attempted to elicit testimony about that situation.  Cohen confirmed that it related to a Bay Area lawyer.  That would be the Criminal Stalker, Stephen Gianelli, who was communicating privately (or attempting to) with my then minor son.  The FBI is clear that adult strangers online should be viewed cautiously as there are sexual predators online.  I have no idea if Gianelli is a sexual predator, member of NAMBLA, serial murderer, or related to the Mafia (as he alludes to in his not so veiled threats towards me) because I do not know this criminal.  The requests for tax information annoyed Leonard Cohen.  LAPD’s TMU is quite clear about that.  They felt the emails were generally requests for tax information and noted that in their report.  Cohen can now call them liars.  The tax fraud I reported to IRS on April 15, 2005 annoyed Leonard Cohen?  Well, neither Cohen nor the City Attorney are in any position to address IRS matters.  The Court itself successfully prevented IRS from taking the witness stand after we issued a subpoena to IRS.  What did the jurors state in debriefing?  They wanted to hear from IRS.  That’s a very serious matter since Cohen, Kory, and the prosecutor all lied about federal tax matters.  There were serious Brady material violations – including with respect to Phil Spector’s Grand Jury testimony since the prosecutor elicited testimony about that.

I didn’t knowingly and willingly violate any order and will address this in the motion to vacate the fraud domestic violence order I am filing in the near future.  There was no domestic violence order and I was not in a dating or engagement relationship with Leonard Cohen.  He simply perjured himself over this matter and confirmed, on the stand, that he changed his testimony from one hearing to the next.  He also testified that I never stole from him.  I will point out that the fraud financial ledger includes the year 2004. 

Gianelli has not entered a formal appearance in any of these matters.  He simply criminally harasses me and all witnesses and others.  He is an agent provocateur, attempts to infiltrate matters, and criminally harasses and attempts to intimidate witnesses, etc.  Leonard Cohen is an inveterate liar and, as Steven Machat has noted, falsely accuses his representatives of ripping him off to breach contracts and uses religion to project an image to the world that he finds fitting.  At the end of the day, Leonard Cohen is an inveterate liar.  Please review the evidence of Cohen’s devotion to armaments.  Evidently his head and chest are also interchangeable.

All the best,

Kelley

The Guns Of Leonard Cohen

WALTHER PPK

Leonard Cohen’s Walther PPK1  was mentioned in a recent post, Quiet And Devastating, Like Leonard Cohen In Cowboy Boot:

He also bought a Walther PPK, which, I suspect, was then the handgun of choice among your Tennessee transplants who were Canadian singer-songwriters-poets-novelist-soon to be icons

Ira Nadel, writing in Various Positions (Random House of Canada, 1996), notes that Cohen’s Walther was “the largest weapon he [Leonard Cohen] had at the time [when Cohen lived in Franklin, Tennessee, where he moved in 1968],” implying that Cohen owned other, albeit smaller caliber, guns.

WINCHESTER CENTENNIAL ’66 RIFLE

The Winchester rifle is discussed in this excerpt  from Leonard Cohen, The Lord Byron of Rock-and-Roll by Karen Schoemer (New York Times, November 29, 1992) found at Speaking Cohen:

After New York, Mr. Cohen lived for a year on a 1,500-acre homestead in Franklin, Tenn., rented for $75 a month. “Ah, that was a very pleasant period of my life,” he says wistfully. “There was a shack — a well-equipped shack, but not much more than that — beside a stream. There were peacocks and peahen. They used to come to my cabin every morning. I’d feed them. I had one of those centennial rifles that Remington put out, I think, in ’67.” He pauses. “When was this country founded? ’76?” He seems somewhat dismayed that mathematics could interfere with a colorful detail of his story. “Anyway, I had some kind of centennial rifle. I would amuse myself by shooting icicles on the far side of the creek.” [emphasis mine]

While the Bicentennial of the United States, the date of which Mr Cohen was attempting  to plug into his formula to calculate when he purchased the rifle, was, one supposes, a nice enough event, it was not the occasion the Winchester Repeating Arms Company chose to celebrate with the manufacture of  their Centennial Rifle. Chuck Hawks explains:

1966 was the Winchester Repeating Arms Company’s 100th year of operation. To commemorate this occasion, Winchester produced a run of fancy Model 94 rifles. These were based on post 1964 Model 94′s actions with a gold plated receiver and forend cap, brass “rifle” (curved) buttplate, saddle ring, and a heavy octagon barrel with a full length magazine that was nicely polished and deeply blued. The straight hand stock was select walnut. All were in caliber .30-30 Winchester. There were rifle (26″) and carbine (20″) barrel lengths, and sets of rifle and carbine with consecutive serial numbers were also offered. The point to all of the gold and brass was to make the 1966 Centennial reminiscent of the brass framed Winchester 1866 “Yellow Boy” rifle that was Winchester’s first product.2

.45 CALIBER PISTOL

In 1973, Cohen flew  to Jerusalem to sign up on the Israeli side in the Yom Kippur Warbut was instead assigned to a USO-style entertainer tour of front-line tank emplacements in the Sinai Desert, coming under fire.  Cohen, according to Nadel (Various Positions), armed himself by stealing a .45 pistol from a deserted shed at a desert airport.3

It was also a .45 pistol that, according to anecdote often told by Cohen, Phil Spector held to Cohen’s head.

His album Death of a Ladies’ Man was produced by Phil Spector, the reclusive genius of girl-group pop. “I was flipped out at the time,” Cohen said later, “and he certainly was flipped out. For me, the expression was withdrawal and melancholy, and for him, megalomania and insanity and a devotion to armaments that was really intolerable. In the state that he found himself, which was post-Wagnerian, I would say Hitlerian, the atmosphere was one of guns – the music was a subsidiary enterprise … At a certain point Phil approached me with a bottle of kosher red wine in one hand and a .45 in the other, put his arm around my shoulder and shoved the revolver into my neck and said, ‘Leonard, I love you.’ I said, ‘I hope you do, Phil.’”4

 .38 CALIBER PISTOL

Leonard Cohen’s father, Nathan Cohen, served in the Canadian Expeditionary Force during World War I and consequently possessed what Nadel (Various Positions) called “a military souvenir,” which Leonard Cohen describes in “The Favourite Game” as “a huge .38.”  The problem is that the only handguns Canadian forces were issued or allowed to purchase during World War I were .45 caliber pistols.5   Of course, “a military souvenir” could include any handgun Nathan Cohen came to own as a result of the war.  The .38 pistol in the image is the Smith & Wesson Military & Police Model initially developed in 1899 and subsequently used by the military and police forces in many countries.

Update: See also Bang Bang – A 2nd Shot At Leonard Cohen & Guns

http://1heckofaguy.com/2011/11/12/the-guns-of-leonard-cohen/

From: STEPHEN R. GIANELLI <stephengianelli@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, Apr 25, 2015 at 9:29 AM
Subject: Kelley Lynch email dated Sat, Apr 20, 2013 at 5:45 PM - Republished on her blog
To: kelley.lynch.2010@gmail.com
Cc: Mick Brown <mick.brown@telegraph.co.uk>, woodwardb <woodwardb@washpost.com>, rand.hoffman@umusic.com, moseszzz <moseszzz@mztv.com>, "Kelly.Sopko" <Kelly.Sopko@tigta.treas.gov>, Washington Field <washington.field@ic.fbi.gov>, rbyucaipa@yahoo.com, Robert MacMillan <robert.macmillan@gmail.com>, "glenn.greenwald" <glenn.greenwald@guardiannews.com>, lrohter <lrohter@nytimes.com>, van.penick@mcinnescooper.com, anndiamond2011@gmail.com

Ms. Lynch,

The referenced post by Ann diamond, that Diamond removed from her blog (“My Life with Leonard Cohen”), was a fanciful post about a (for want of a better word) magical connection that Diamond claims to have made with Leonard Cohen as a young woman. It had nothing to do with the groundless molestation allegation that Guttmann and Lorca Cohen both deny and that you gleefully and maliciously published (and have republished twice on your blog this week).

As for an alleged email wherein Cohen purportedly offered a differing account of the details of Phil Spector pointing a gun at him,  this issue simply was not material to the issues that your criminal jury was charged with deciding: Did Kelley Lynch know about the 2008 Colorado restraining order and did she send emails to Leonard Cohen in 2011 in violation of that order that had nothing to do with “tax information” as she claimed as a trial defense.

Your emails accusing Cohen of testifying falsely before the Spector grand jury about the gun incident, of molesting Lorca Cohen, of being responsible for Rutger’s industrial accident at Whole Foods, your emails about NAMBLA, accusing Cohen of committing “tax fraud” and raising other subjects were introduced by the prosecution for the sole reason that these subjects (in addition to being harassing) had noting whatsoever to do with seeking tax information from Cohen and therefore demonstrated that your defense was baloney.

Your public defender briefly cross-examined Cohen on whether Mr. Spector did in fact point a gun at him (eliciting a yes) and what kind of gun it was (an “automatic”) which answer you have claimed was “inconsistent” with Cohen’s answer to the same question at your bail hearing (“a semi-automatic”) and with an email in the possession of the prosecutor wherein, you claim, Cohen gave a “third version”.

Setting aside that to a lay-person the words “automatic” (which is a very common expression used to describe a semi-automatic handgun)  and “semi-automatic” are interchangeable, this whole line of questioning was so attenuated from the crux of the matter before the court (did Kelley Lynch knowingly violate the 2008 Colorado order) as to be non-material and not Brady material at all, not even close.

Finally, as the three-judge appellate panel which denied your post-conviction petition for writ of habeas corpus observed, the trial evidence against you was so overwhelming  (hundreds of emails and scores of voice messages transmitted to Cohen after the Colorado order was registered in California, many of which were abusive and some of which threatened Cohen’s personal safety) nothing done differently at your trial would have been likely to result in anything except your conviction on all counts.

As a further aside (although you don’t raise the issue in the below email), you should keep in mind that the primary offense the case was submitted to the jury on – violating Penal Code § 273.5, subdivision (a) would have been violated whether the Colorado order was characterized as a civil harassment restraining order or a domestic violence order, because § 273.5 (a) applies with equal force to BOTH kinds of orders.

In short, it is Kelley Lynch who needs to get her facts (and law) straight, and not the rest of the world.

Very truly yours,

Stephen R. Gianelli

Attorney-at-Law (ret.)

Crete, Greece