Kelley Lynch's Email To City Attorney Mike Feuer & Mayor Garcetti Re. The Criminal Stalker's Harassment Of Many LA Residents

From: Kelley Lynch <kelley.lynch.2010@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, Jun 27, 2015 at 2:39 PM
Subject: Fwd: FEDERAL MAGISTRATE JUDGE REJECTS PHIL SPECTOR'S FEDERAL MURDER APPEAL - REPORT RECOMMENDS DISMISSAL OF SPECTOR'S WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS FILED 06/18/2012
To: "*IRS.Commisioner" <*IRS.Commisioner@irs.gov>, Washington Field <washington.field@ic.fbi.gov>, ASKDOJ <ASKDOJ@usdoj.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>, Harriet Ryan <harriet.ryan@latimes.com>, "hailey.branson" <hailey.branson@latimes.com>, "stan.garnett" <stan.garnett@gmail.com>, Mike Feuer <mike.feuer@lacity.org>, "mayor.garcetti" <mayor.garcetti@lacity.org>, Opla-pd-los-occ <OPLA-PD-LOS-OCC@ice.dhs.gov>, "Kelly.Sopko" <Kelly.Sopko@tigta.treas.gov>, Whistleblower <whistleblower@judiciary-rep.senate.gov>, Attacheottawa <AttacheOttawa@ci.irs.gov>
Cc: Stephen Gianelli <stephengianelli@gmail.com>

Mike Feuer and Mayor Garcetti,

I have been clear that Gianelli should stop criminally harassing me over Leonard Cohen, IRS matters, Phil Spector, Karina Von Watteville,etc.  I was clear that he should file the suit on her behalf and stop harassing me.  LAPD's TMU will be subpoenaed re. Linda Carol's confirmation of information in her declaration.  I will also demand discovery related to Von Watteville's communications with Robert Kory following her receipt of Paulette Brandt's rent demand letter and the Small Claims matter itself.  

This man belongs in prison for his conduct and that includes criminally harassing my sons, sister, friends, family members, and others, for over six straight years.  As many people have noted, he is a dangerous psychopath and deranged.

I have copied the Criminal Stalker, Stephen Gianelli, on this email so all parties are clear.  Many LA residents have been criminally harassed by this Stalker since he heard from Cohen's lawyer, Michelle Rice, in May 2009.  

Kelley Lynch

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Stephen Gianelli <stephengianelli@gmail.com>Date: Sat, Jun 27, 2015 at 2:15 PM
Subject: Re: FEDERAL MAGISTRATE JUDGE REJECTS PHIL SPECTOR'S FEDERAL MURDER APPEAL - REPORT RECOMMENDS DISMISSAL OF SPECTOR'S WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS FILED 06/18/2012
To: Kelley Lynch <kelley.lynch.2010@gmail.com>

Cc: Paulette Brandt <paulettebrandt8@gmail.com>, Linda Carol International Hollywood Star <lindacarol184@gmail.com>, Karina Von Watteville <karina.inger.v@gmail.com>

REDACTED RANT

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: STEPHEN R. GIANELLI <stephengianelli@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, Jun 27, 2015 at 8:57 AM
Subject: FEDERAL MAGISTRATE JUDGE REJECTS PHIL SPECTOR'S FEDERAL MURDER APPEAL - REPORT RECOMMENDS DISMISSAL OF SPECTOR'S WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS FILED 06/18/2012
To: blind <distribution@gmail.com>

***BREAKING NEWS***

Federal Magistrate Judge Paul L. Abrams has issued a “report and recommendation” to  the Hon. S. James Otero, Judge for the Central District of California in Los Angeles asking Judge Otero to deny music legend Phil Spector’s pending petition for writ of habeas corpus, pending since June 18, 2012.

“It is recommended that the District Court issue an Order: (1) accepting this Report and Recommendation; and (2) directing that judgment be entered denying the Petition and dismissing this action with prejudice.” the report, FILED June 19, 2015 states.

Because Phil Spector refused to stipulate to have the matter decided by a magistrate, procedure requires that the magistrate submit his written decision on the petition in the form of a recommendation, which must be incorporated into an order and approved by the trial judge – which is usually merely a formality in such matters.  

àCOURT FILED COPY OF MAGISTRATE JUDGE’S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION ATTACHED.

Highlights:

1. It was a proper exercise of the trial court’s prerogative to “comment on the evidence” to show Court TV footage of the trial judge from trial #1 to the jury in trial #2, noting where a criminalist testified she saw blood splatter on the victim’s hand by pointing to his own wrist and verbally describing what he saw.

2. The Court TV video footage was therefore properly shown to the jury.

3. It was therefore not “prosecutorial misconduct” for trial prosecutors to highlight the Court TV video footage to the jury during closing argument.

Should  Judge Otero adopt the magistrate’s recommendation and dismiss the petition – as is expected – Phil Spector’s legal recourse is to appeal the decision to the 9^th Circuit Court of Appeals.

END***END***END***END***END

Fraud Upon The Tax Court

ADDENDUM TO
TAX COURT PETITION

Fraud upon the court consists of a pattern of deceit and dishonesty directed at the court, so as to interfere with its ability to impartially adjudicate a dispute.  Kenner v. Commissioner, 387 F.2d 689, 691 (7th Cir. 1968).  It occurs where it can be clearly and convincingly demonstrated that a party has set in motion an unconscionable scheme calculated to interfere with the judicial system’s ability to impartially adjudicate a matter.  Aoude v. Mobile Oil Corp., 892 F.2d 1115, 1118 (1st Cir. 1989).  It is a special species of fraud regarded not only as harmful to adverse parties, but to the judicial process itself.  Kenner, 387 F.2d at 691. 

The leading case on fraud upon the court is Hazel-Atlas v. Hartford-Empire, in which the Supreme Court held that a judgment based on fraud upon the court can, and should, be vacated, regardless of its age.  Hazel-Atlas Glass Co. v. Hartford-Empire, 322 U.S. 238, 250 (1944).  The facts of Hazel-Atlas revealed an extensive fraudulent scheme directed not only against the adverse party, but also against both the trial and appellate courts.  The U.S. Supreme Court referred to this particular species of fraud as not only “an injury to a single litigant. It is a wrong against the institutions set up to protect and safeguard the public, institutions in which fraud cannot complacently be tolerated consistent with the good order of society.” 

The Tax Court possesses the authority to vacate or modify its judgment, despite its finality under section 7481.  The balancing of the statutory finality rule and the implied judicial power to review and vacate fraudulently obtained judgments led the Seventh Circuit to conclude that a judgment obtained through fraud upon the court is not a judgment at all, and thus never becomes final.  Expressly rejecting the Eighth Circuit’s decision in Jefferson Loan, the Seventh Circuit concluded that the Tax Court possesses the power to inquire into the integrity of its own decisions, even when such decisions have become final and immutable in all other respects.  However, the taxpayer’s victory in Kenner was incomplete. While the court held that the Tax Court did possess the authority to review an otherwise final judgment for alleged fraud upon the court, it also held that the taxpayer failed to substantiate his fraud claim.  Fraud upon the court is limited to “that species of fraud which does, or attempts to, defile the court itself, or is fraud perpetrated by officers of the court, so that the court cannot perform its task of impartially adjudicating cases.”  The taxpayer was unsuccessful in establishing a pattern of conduct that met the above definition of fraud upon the court.

 The year following the Seventh Circuit’s opinion in Kenner, Congress enacted the Tax Reform Act of 1969.  One of the provisions in that legislation “elevated” the status of the Tax Court to that of an Article I court, as opposed to an independent executive agency.  Congress’ enactment of this provision could be seen as tacit approval of the Seventh Circuit’s holding in Kenner. By clearly defining the Tax Court as a court, Congress bestowed upon them judicial  authority. The authority to review otherwise final judgments for alleged fraud upon the court would seemingly fall into that category. 

Three years later, the Ninth Circuit in Toscano, citing Kenner, held that the Tax Court possessed the authority to review and vacate an otherwise final judgment on the grounds of fraud upon the court.  Toscano v. Commissioner, 441 F.2d 930, 935 (9th Cir. 1971).  The Ninth Circuit subsequently addressed one of the most notorious claims of fraud upon the Tax Court in Dixon, which involved a fraudulent scheme carried out by counsel for the government.  Dixon v. Commissioner, 316 F.3d 1041 (9th Cir. 2003).

Proof of fraud by itself is insufficient. The taxpayer must substantiate an intentional plan of deception designed to influence the court in rendering its decision. 

The Tax Court in Abeles held that it possessed the authority to vacate a judgment rendered against a taxpayer over whom it had acquired no jurisdiction.  A prerequisite to Tax Court jurisdiction is the issuance by the Internal Revenue Service of a statutory notice of deficiency.  The IRS had delivered a notice to the taxpayer’s exspouse, proposing a deficiency on a joint return filed by both the taxpayer and her spouse.  However, the taxpayer in Abeles had recently divorced from her husband and never received the notice.  The husband subsequently filed a Tax Court petition in his own name, later filing an amended petition purportedly containing the taxpayer’s signature as well.  After the Tax Court rendered judgment for the government, the taxpayer challenged the court’s judgment on jurisdictional grounds, claiming that she was never a party to the case or the resulting judgment.  The taxpayer successfully asserted that she never filed a petition, stating that the signature on the amended petition was a forgery.  Accordingly, the judgment rendered against the taxpayer was void.  Abeles v. Commissioner, 90 T.C. 103, 109 (1988).

As an Article I court, the Tax Court does not possess implied judicial authority, including the equitable power to revisit a final judgment to achieve a just result. Accordingly, section 7481’s finality rule has been strictly construed. Exceptions to this rule have slowly developed. Two exceptions that have developed without much contention are correction of clerical errors and lack of jurisdiction. However, fraud upon the court is a third exception that has been, and remains, quite contentious. The Supreme Court held in 1944 that a district court possesses the authority to revisit an otherwise final judgment on grounds of fraud upon the court. However, it was more than twenty years before that exception was extended to the Tax Court.

What Has The Russian FSB Concluded About The Forensic Science In Phil Spector's Case?

From: Kelley Lynch <kelley.lynch.2010@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, Jun 27, 2015 at 11:46 AM
Subject: Fwd: FEDERAL MAGISTRATE JUDGE REJECTS PHIL SPECTOR'S FEDERAL MURDER APPEAL - REPORT RECOMMENDS DISMISSAL OF SPECTOR'S WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS FILED 06/18/2012
To: fsb <fsb@fsb.ru>, "*IRS.Commisioner" <*IRS.Commisioner@irs.gov>, Washington Field <washington.field@ic.fbi.gov>, ASKDOJ <ASKDOJ@usdoj.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>, 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>, Harriet Ryan <harriet.ryan@latimes.com>, "hailey.branson" <hailey.branson@latimes.com>, "stan.garnett" <stan.garnett@gmail.com>, Mike Feuer <mike.feuer@lacity.org>, "mayor.garcetti" <mayor.garcetti@lacity.org>, Opla-pd-los-occ <OPLA-PD-LOS-OCC@ice.dhs.gov>, "Kelly.Sopko" <Kelly.Sopko@tigta.treas.gov>, Whistleblower <whistleblower@judiciary-rep.senate.gov>, Attacheottawa <AttacheOttawa@ci.irs.gov>

Hi FSB,

How are you?  I'd love to hear your thoughts on the forensic evidence.  I would assume FSB understands forensics.  This case continues to remind me of the false allegations against Andrei Lugovoy and Dmitri Kovtun.  In other words, it defies logic.  I realize that one involves a gun and the other polonium-210 but they have certain similarities and I've always thought that.  Primarily, it's based on propaganda, false accusations, shoddy journalism, and a complete lack of forensic science.  I'm going to include these cases in my book because they also reveal how corrupt the western system of law can be.  

All the best,

Kelley

https://www.scribd.com/doc/269847052/Federal-District-Court-Rejects-Phil-Spector-s-Federal-Court-Appeal-Report-and-Reccomendation-of-the-Magistrate-in-Phil-Spector-s-Federal-Petition-fo

The Criminal Stalker Is Excited

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: STEPHEN R. GIANELLI <stephengianelli@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, Jun 27, 2015 at 8:57 AM
Subject: FEDERAL MAGISTRATE JUDGE REJECTS PHIL SPECTOR'S FEDERAL MURDER APPEAL - REPORT RECOMMENDS DISMISSAL OF SPECTOR'S WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS FILED 06/18/2012
To: blind <distribution@gmail.com>

***BREAKING NEWS***

Federal Magistrate Judge Paul L. Abrams has issued a “report and recommendation” to  the Hon. S. James Otero, Judge for the Central District of California in Los Angeles asking Judge Otero to deny music legend Phil Spector’s pending petition for writ of habeas corpus, pending since June 18, 2012.

“It is recommended that the District Court issue an Order: (1) accepting this Report and Recommendation; and (2) directing that judgment be entered denying the Petition and dismissing this action with prejudice.” the report, FILED June 19, 2015 states.

Because Phil Spector refused to stipulate to have the matter decided by a magistrate, procedure requires that the magistrate submit his written decision on the petition in the form of a recommendation, which must be incorporated into an order and approved by the trial judge – which is usually merely a formality in such matters.  

àCOURT FILED COPY OF MAGISTRATE JUDGE’S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION ATTACHED.

Highlights:

1. It was a proper exercise of the trial court’s prerogative to “comment on the evidence” to show Court TV footage of the trial judge from trial #1 to the jury in trial #2, noting where a criminalist testified she saw blood splatter on the victim’s hand by pointing to his own wrist and verbally describing what he saw.

2. The Court TV video footage was therefore properly shown to the jury.

3. It was therefore not “prosecutorial misconduct” for trial prosecutors to highlight the Court TV video footage to the jury during closing argument.

Should  Judge Otero adopt the magistrate’s recommendation and dismiss the petition – as is expected – Phil Spector’s legal recourse is to appeal the decision to the 9^th Circuit Court of Appeals.

END***END***END***END***END

The Criminal Proxy Attempts To Elicit Further Information Re. Cohen, IRS, & Tax Matters

From: Kelley Lynch <kelley.lynch.2013@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, Jun 27, 2015 at 7:35 AM
Subject: Fwd: Blog posted email dated Fri, Jun 26, 2015 at 2:28 PM
To: Dan Bergman <dbergman@bergman-law.com>, Michelle Rice <mrice@koryrice.com>, "*IRS.Commisioner" <*IRS.Commisioner@irs.gov>, Washington Field <washington.field@ic.fbi.gov>, ASKDOJ <ASKDOJ@usdoj.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>, Harriet Ryan <harriet.ryan@latimes.com>, "hailey.branson" <hailey.branson@latimes.com>, "stan.garnett" <stan.garnett@gmail.com>, Mike Feuer <mike.feuer@lacity.org>, "mayor.garcetti" <mayor.garcetti@lacity.org>, Opla-pd-los-occ <OPLA-PD-LOS-OCC@ice.dhs.gov>, "Kelly.Sopko" <Kelly.Sopko@tigta.treas.gov>, Whistleblower <whistleblower@judiciary-rep.senate.gov>, Attacheottawa <AttacheOttawa@ci.irs.gov>

Daniel Bergman and Michelle Rice,

I've received numerous criminally harassing emails today from the Stalker.

Leonard Cohen wrote, and signed, the authorization to Neal Greenberg with respect to his transactions fees.  Please refer to that document as he paid me my commission.  Does he now view paying people for work they spent years on as problematic?  I didn't have to sign as a POA.  I had a 99.5% ownership interest.  See all corporate books and records re. the distributions including with respect to profit.  Also, see Westin's March 6, 2002 letter.  I asked him to prepare that.  

I see - going to the IRS in 2002 or 2004 is harassment of Leonard Cohen?  That sounds positively insane.  I didn't "borrow."  I was advised that all distributions should be characterized as "shareholder loans" until Westin recharacterized the nature of them.  It's probably best to stop lying about these matters since most of it is in writing.  I, of course, am filing a motion re. the sealing of documents.  I didn't have a/c privilege but these documents were sent to me.  You're lawyers - figure it out.

Westin did not initiate the IRS inquiry into $1 million prepayment Cohen personally received and failed to transfer to TH or BMT.  The IRS initiated that.  I think IRS is aware of that fact.

The individual who didn't repay their alleged loans/expenditures is Leonard Cohen.  They total approximately $6.7 million and had to be repaid within three years with interest.  

Gianelli has no idea what I talked to the Chief Trial Counsel's office about other than some discussion about fraud upon the court re. the 2002 Tax Court matter.  However, I had already written the Chief Trial Counsel's office in July 2004 and submitted evidence to them.  I also advised them that I would provide IRS with further evidence and details.  My Tax Court matter is not something I am going to discuss.  Is it your position that Tax Court doesn't have to review fee waivers?

If you have any questions hit reply all.  I don't speak with proxy criminals who are not attorneys of record.

Kelley Lynch

The Criminal Stalker's Client Now Appears To Believe She Speaks For IRS, FBI & DOJ

From: Kelley Lynch <kelley.lynch.2010@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, Jun 26, 2015 at 6:16 PM
Subject: 
To: "*IRS.Commisioner" <*IRS.Commisioner@irs.gov>, Washington Field <washington.field@ic.fbi.gov>, ASKDOJ <ASKDOJ@usdoj.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>, Harriet Ryan <harriet.ryan@latimes.com>, "hailey.branson" <hailey.branson@latimes.com>, "stan.garnett" <stan.garnett@gmail.com>, Mike Feuer <mike.feuer@lacity.org>, "mayor.garcetti" <mayor.garcetti@lacity.org>, Opla-pd-los-occ <OPLA-PD-LOS-OCC@ice.dhs.gov>, "Kelly.Sopko" <Kelly.Sopko@tigta.treas.gov>, Whistleblower <whistleblower@judiciary-rep.senate.gov>, Attacheottawa <AttacheOttawa@ci.irs.gov>

Hi IRS, FBI, and DOJ,

Apart from Gianelli's criminally harassing emails, attempting to elicit information about Tax Court and my communications with IRS and the Chief Trial Counsel's office, Karina Von Watteville continues to post psychotic rants on her attorney's blog dedicated to slandering and lying about me, federal tax matters, and issues related to Leonard Cohen.  No one sleeps on the floor.  It sounds as thought KVW is threatening Paulette actually with respect to her apartment.  That's a very serious matter.  Does Von Watteville speak for IRS, FBI, or DOJ?  She certainly appears to be.  I find that particularly disturbing since she does not work for any of these agencies and is not authorized to speak for them.  

This woman, with Gianelli, defrauded Paulette of $6,700 in rental arrears; called Robert Kory after receiving Paulette's rent demand letter; began ranting about Cohen and Kory to Paulette and the mediators; and then set off on a campaign - with Gianelli - to slander and discredit me and others.  Linda Carol is the individual who prepared the declaration provided to Paulette Brandt for her Small Claims case and approved on May 22, 2015 - not I.  

These people are out of their minds.  KVW has decided to interfere in Leonard Cohen's tax matter.  There is a Leonard Cohen tax matter and I discussed some of the issues, including the fraud upon the Tax Court, with the IRS Chief Trial Counsel's office the other day.  I have also challenged his tax refunds as fraudulent and believe that means his 2005 tax returns, amended 2004 and 2003 returns, and carry-backs on his 2001 and 2002 returns are all fraudulent.  I am aware of no case this blatant that the IRS didn't prosecute.  I am aware, and the State of Kentucky confirmed this as well, that IRS may not disclose details of any probable prosecution or investigation prior to filing the Complaint.  The State of Kentucky would like everything I sent IRS including all emails I authorized IRS to access and use.  Those emails are all communications between me and Cohen and Cohen and his representatives.  I didn't have a/c privilege and therefore when those documents were sent to me, the sender was responsible for any a/c privilege breach.  Westin understood that I didn't have a/c privilege when he advised Steve Blanq of Hochman Rettig about this.  Furthermore, the documents relate to the corporations and many of them were purchased on PACER or are available through other courts and state websites.  Furthermore, some of the sealed documents were attached to Neal Greenberg's lawsuit and no one seemed to argue a/c privilege which is fascinating.  My emails refuting Cohen and his representatives are not privileged.  I have no idea what Judge Hess was doing but this matter, once I file the motion to unseal, will be appealed if necessary.  Judge Hess wanted to know how he should know that documents are publicly available.  One ways that Judge Hess could know would have been to review the evidence prior to sealing it.  Otherwise, he may have sealed the newspaper for all he knew.

All the best,

Kelley

1. BlogonautJune 23, 2015 at 11:47 AM

   UPDATE: Judge Hess: "Motion denied". Lynch vows appeal all the way to the US Supreme Court. Full hearing coverage in a separate post later.

   Reply
2. 
   Karina Von WattevilleJune 25, 2015 at 10:42 PM

   This should finish her.Lynch is a nobody fame junkie rag hag living on Paulette's floor still grinding out fiction emails to agencies that don't care. Soon the floor will be gone when they all have to go!

http://kelleylynchsociopath.blogspot.gr/2015/06/leonard-cohen-got-99-problems-but.html

Kelley Lynch Did Report These Issues To IRS In 2002 & June 2004 - Two Years & Four Months Before She & Cohen Parted Ways

From: Kelley Lynch <kelley.lynch.2013@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, Jun 26, 2015 at 2:28 PM
Subject: Re:
To: "*irs. commissioner" <*IRS.Commissioner@irs.gov>, Washington Field <washington.field@ic.fbi.gov>, ASKDOJ <ASKDOJ@usdoj.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>, 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>, OPLA-PD-LOS-OCC@ice.dhs.gov, "Kelly.Sopko" <Kelly.Sopko@tigta.treas.gov>, rettig@taxlitigator.com
Cc: Michelle Rice <mrice@koryrice.com>, Dan Bergman <dbergman@bergman-law.com>

Daniel Bergman and Michelle Rice,

I won't be discussing details of the Tax Court Petition matter.  However, I did go to the IRS at the time; wrote Mr. Holtz in June 2004 (after the IRS warning letters); submitted evidence at that time (BEFORE Cohen and I parted ways); and reported the tax fraud to IRS again in April 2005.  There's your answer.

Mr. Rettig should know that I attempted to address my concerns and Westin prevented that.  I also thought Hochman, Rettig should be aware of information being concealed from them.

Kelley Lynch

On Fri, Jun 26, 2015 at 2:26 PM, Kelley Lynch <kelley.lynch.2013@gmail.com> wrote:

IRS,

Stephen Gianelli continues to write me about federal tax matters and tax fraud.  He obviously is on someone's payroll and this is illegal discovery practices.  So was my trial or set up.

I spoke to Steve Blanq, expressed concerns about Traditional Holdings and the annuity itself, and Mr. Blanq received a phone call from Richard Westin advising him not to speak to me about these matters because I didn't have attorney/client privilege.  I didn't.  Leonard Cohen wrapped Neal Greenberg and Richard Westin into a/c privilege and I was excluded.  I did express my concerns.  In fact, I told Ken Cleveland, Cohen's accountant, that I was thinking of calling the Ogden, Utah agent and inviting him into my office based on the document request alone - since Steve Blanq told me that Richard Westin made the IRS nervous with his evasiveness.

Furthermore, at the time, I also contacted the Chief Trial Counsel's office.  I also submitted evidence to him.  I also wrote Mr. Holtz, Chief Trial Counsel's office, in 2004.  At that time, I submitted Neal Greenberg's IRS warning letters and advised Mr. Holtz that I reviewed these letters with Leonard Cohen and he told me (and others) not to let Neal Greenberg know about any future income or the fact that he planned to tour.  I also sent Mr. Holtz my February 2002 emails with Cohen and Westin and explained the situation with respect to the inadvertent $1 million and $7 million 1099s to Leonard Cohen.  I provided Mr. Holtz with the corporate records, non-revocable assignments, Westin's memorandum, etc.  I have that letter to Mr. Holtz and will make it public when I have time.

For now, I'm working on a notice of appeal in Case No. BC338322; motion to vacate Cohen's fraud restraining order; motion to unseal the documents (including the documents I bought on PACER); Opposition to the retaliatory sanctions motion; and other legal matters.  I am also focused on my federal RICO lawsuit against Leonard Cohen and others.  And, I continue to be criminally harassed by Stephen Gianelli.  Others are being as well.

In response to Gianelli's attempt to elicit information - I did go to the IRS then; again in 2004; and again after Cohen and I parted ways.  I also just spoke to the Chief Trial Counsel's office about the fraud upon the Tax Court and my Petition to Tax Court.  He and I also discussed the civil matters related to the partnerships.  That's one of the issues that will be addressed in my RICO suit because LA Superior Court didn't obtain jurisdiction over the entities EITHER.

All the best,

Kelley

CORRECTION:  IRS, One correction.  I just reviewed my letter to the Chief Trial Counsel's office.  It was dated July 25, 2004.  Therefore, it was sent in July and not June.  Greenberg's last IRS warning letter, which was enclosed with other evidence, was dated June 2004.

From: Stephen Gianelli <stephengianelli@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, Jun 26, 2015 at 12:52 PM
Subject:
To: Kelley Lynch <kelley.lynch.2010@gmail.com>

You now claim on your blog that you reported "concerns" to Cohen's tax counsel who refused to discuss the matter with you. 

So why didn't you go. To the IRS THEN? Why. Wait thirteen years to do so?  

Sent from my BlackBerry 10 smartphone.

The Proxy Criminal Should Address His Questions To Leonard Cohen & His Legal Representatives

From: Kelley Lynch <kelley.lynch.2010@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, Jun 26, 2015 at 11:33 AM
Subject: Re: Your latest blog post accusing Leonard Cohen of fraud on the tax court
To: "*IRS.Commisioner" <*IRS.Commisioner@irs.gov>, Washington Field <washington.field@ic.fbi.gov>, ASKDOJ <ASKDOJ@usdoj.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 <mike.feuer@lacity.org>, "mayor.garcetti" <mayor.garcetti@lacity.org>, Opla-pd-los-occ <OPLA-PD-LOS-OCC@ice.dhs.gov>, "Kelly.Sopko" <Kelly.Sopko@tigta.treas.gov>, Whistleblower <whistleblower@judiciary-rep.senate.gov>, Attacheottawa <AttacheOttawa@ci.irs.gov>, rettig@taxlitigator.com
Cc: Dan Bergman <dbergman@bergman-law.com>, Michelle Rice <mrice@koryrice.com>

Daniel Bergman and Michelle Rice,

Do you have any questions about this matter?  Well, hit reply all.  I don't respond to proxy criminals.

Kelley Lynch

On Fri, Jun 26, 2015 at 11:33 AM, Kelley Lynch <kelley.lynch.2010@gmail.com> wrote:

IRS, FBI, and DOJ,

I complained to various parties about this situation.  First of all, I asked Steve Blanq (Hochman, Rettig) to review the Traditional Holdings LLC corporate documents and advise me if something was wrong.  Steve Blanq then called me and advised me that Richard Westin phoned him directly to advise him not to discuss that issue with me because I didn't have attorney/client privilege.  Steve Blanq can testify about that fact.  I also wrote the Chief Trial Counsel's office because I was alarmed.  I don't always accuse Leonard Cohen of tax fraud.  My lawyers and accountant believed he committed criminal tax fraud.  Dale Burgess, who was NOT fired, worked for IRS and believed IRS Criminal Intelligence should be involved here.  He asked me to advise IRS and Treasury that he witnessed Kory's offer of 50% community proper.  I also have that in writing from my lawyers.  Everyone is not lying.  Ken Cleveland personally advised me (and does not believe what Robert Kory testified he believes) that this situation resembles ENRON, that he cannot understand it all - let alone me, and he felt IRS would file charges against Leonard Cohen.  Ed Dean, who represented Cohen and the charitable remainder trusts, told me that the IRS Commissioner would or should come in after Leonard Cohen and his representatives.  Should I go on?  Someone at Deneuve Construction has a brother who works for Criminal Intelligence at IRS and he was phoning him about this matter and what he was witnessing.  That would include Robert Kory and Daniel Bergman contacting Phil Schull who, I might note, reviewed the emails to IRS.  He understood I asked Bergman for Ray's social security number for their forms re. life insurance.  Phil Shull got his lawyer involved.  He's an extremely intelligent man.  

I don't have any expertise. The people I just mentioned do.  Dale Burgess worked for IRS.  The Tax Court case was not settled by Westin.  I don't know if that's intentional disinformation on Gianelli's part or not.  Hochman, Rettig handled this matter and Steve Blanq later wrote and asked me if I was being blamed for Richard Westin's actions.  I've forwarded that email to IRS.  It was a good guess and Steve Blanq is the individual who advised me that Westin made the IRS agent in Ogden, Utah "nervous" with his evasiveness.

I did address this at the time.  I have a copy of my letter to the IRS Chief Trial Counsel's office from that time. 

Gianelli is on someone's payroll.  I'll submit this evidence to the Tax Court.

All the best,

Kelley

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: STEPHEN R. GIANELLI <stephengianelli@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, Jun 26, 2015 at 11:20 AM
Subject: Your latest blog post accusing Leonard Cohen of fraud on the tax court
To: kelley.lynch.2010@gmail.com

You’re right. There was a tax court case filed by Richard Westin in 2002 that reached a stipulated decision (in other words a settlement) with the IRS.

I can’t wait to learned how exactly the IRS Chief Trial Counsel and the tax court  was “misled” by Richard Westin into agreeing that stipulated disposition, why you believe you have standing to raise the issue, and why you think that – 13-years later you believe that the issue will be re-examined civilly or investigated criminally.

Wait, I forgot, you automatically accuse Leonard Cohen of committing “fraud” in every tax matter in which he has ever been involved, even though your March, 2015 declaration admits that you have no expertise in tax matters and had no involvement in Cohen’s tax issues.

Incidentally, since this tax court case was initiated and settled by Richard Westin DURING your employ by Leonard Cohen while you held Cohen’s general power of attorney, the point being if you thought a “fraud on the tax court” was being perpetrated by Mr. Westin (the matter never went to trial, so Cohen never testified), why didn’t you speak out AT THE TIME?

Leonard Cohen's Prior Tax Court Matter

From: Kelley Lynch <kelley.lynch.2010@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, Jun 26, 2015 at 10:36 AM
Subject: Fwd: Latest flurry of blog posts and emails
To: "*IRS.Commisioner" <*IRS.Commisioner@irs.gov>, Washington Field <washington.field@ic.fbi.gov>, ASKDOJ <ASKDOJ@usdoj.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>, Harriet Ryan <harriet.ryan@latimes.com>, "hailey.branson" <hailey.branson@latimes.com>, "stan.garnett" <stan.garnett@gmail.com>, Mike Feuer <mike.feuer@lacity.org>, "mayor.garcetti" <mayor.garcetti@lacity.org>, Opla-pd-los-occ <OPLA-PD-LOS-OCC@ice.dhs.gov>, "Kelly.Sopko" <Kelly.Sopko@tigta.treas.gov>, Whistleblower <whistleblower@judiciary-rep.senate.gov>, Attacheottawa <AttacheOttawa@ci.irs.gov>

Hi IRS,

I suppose Tax Court doesn't have up-to-date accurate information or older information.  Perhaps my fee waiver is holding things up.  In any event, I have the docket number and here's Cohen's.  Either Gianelli is a moron who doesn't know how to search Tax Court or he lied.  It's one or the other.  There was fraud upon the Tax Court in 2002 and I have addressed that.  I also just spoke to the individual from the IRS Chief Trial Counsel's office who phoned me.  I won't make his name public so Gianelli doesn't harass him.

The rest of the email is preposterous.  I didn't send Gianelli an email.  He's reading my blog.  The man is obsessed.  He is also a liar.

All the best,

Kelley

Docket No.:	007024-02	Caption:	Leonard Cohen 04/05/2002 PETITION Filed:Fee Paid R 04/09/2002 N/A 04/05/2002 DESIGNATION of Trial at Los Angeles, CA R 04/09/2002 N/A 05/13/2002 ANSWER (C/S 05/10/02). N/A 10/24/2002 NOTICE of Trial on 03/24/03 at Los Angeles, CA. B 10/24/2002 N/A 10/24/2002 STANDING PRE-TRIAL ORDER attached to Notice of Trial B 10/24/2002 N/A 11/14/2002 ENTRY OF APPEARANCE by Charles P. Rettig and Steven D. Blanc. R 11/14/2002 N/A 04/01/2003 STIPULATED DECISION ENTERED, Judge Gerber. B 04/01/2003 N/A

Petitioner Counsel
Bar No:	WR0597	Richard Axel Westin
No:	3	1917 Hart Road  Lexington, KY 40502

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: STEPHEN R. GIANELLI <stephengianelli@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, Jun 26, 2015 at 8:56 AM
Subject: Latest flurry of blog posts and emails
To: kelley.lynch.2010@gmail.com

Ms. Lynch,

Regarding your latest flurry of blog  posted emails prominently mentioning me and selectively quoting from my emails, please allow me to retort.

1. Regarding your claim that “Leonard Cohen committed fraud upon the tax court in 2002” a docket search of the United States tax court for cases filed from 1986 yields no results, meaning, Leonard Cohen was not a party to a tax court case during that time period, so he could not have “defrauded the tax court” in 2002 OR IN ANY OTHER YEAR could he? No he couldn’t.  https://www.ustaxcourt.gov/UstcDockInq/Default.aspx?PartyName

2. Regarding your claim that “Gianelli has inside information” about your litigation matter in BC338322, what “inside information” are you speaking of? Because no, I have no “inside information”. I simply know that your 2015 motion decided June 23 is a “motion to reconsider” because it – in part- seeks the same equitable relief that you sought from the court in your 2013 motion to vacate. Any experienced California trial lawyer, judge or appellate justice would know that is the test under CCP § 1008 without even researching it,  and would also be aware of the rule that it is the relief requested in both motions that is determinative, not the label placed on the motions. A review of the tentative law and motion rulings of the Los Angeles Superior Court over the last 60 days reveals that this issue arises several times a month. Litigants often try to relitigate the same issue twice. And CCP § 1008 is unyielding in its application. It does not take a psychic to know what Judge Hess’ tentative ruling was. Even if you didn’t.

3. Regarding your assertion that “These aren't excellent lawyers.  They use tactics.” That is what losers often say. I was waiting in a law and motion department in the early 1990’s and ran into a civil lawyer that I knew from a multi-party construction litigation case – the kind of case where 9 or more lawyers show up for all of the depositions. When I asked how her recent trial when she said: “I lost, but the plaintiff’s lawyer used criminal lawyer tricks.” (As you would put it, “tactics”.) As a lawyer who had by then tried hundreds of criminal AND civil cases to verdict I had to try very hard not to laugh out loud. There are no “criminal lawyer tricks” or “tactics”. There is only “effective” and “ineffective”. Michelle Rice is a highly skilled and highly effective lawyer. I don’t have to know that she graduated from a top tier law school or that she initially worked for the Washington DC office of one of the best regarded law firms in the United States (which makes her the cream of the bar) to know that. Her written advocacy that you posted on-line is top notch, that is true. (And I cannot wait to read the transcript of the 6/23 hearing.)  But the bottom line is: She wins. Not more that her share of her cases. She wins all of her cases – but my observation was more specific: Every case against you that bears Michelle Rice’s fingerprints Leonard Cohen won. So call it “tactics” instead of good lawyering if you must. That is what losers do. The WINNERS don’t need to make excuses do they?

Very truly yours,

Stephen R. Gianelli

Attorney-at-Law (ret.)

Crete, Greece