Kelley Lynch's Email to Senate Judiciary Re. the City and County of Los Angeles, Fraudulent Domestic Violence Orders, VAWA Funding Fraud, & Their Lies About Federal Tax Matters, Witness Tampering & Retaliation

From: Kelley Lynch <kelley.lynch.2013@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, Dec 5, 2015 at 1:41 PM
Subject: Local Los Angeles Government Actors Have The Expectation Of Affection Re. Leonard Cohen
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 <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>, tips@radaronline.com, alan hootnick <ahootnick@yahoo.com>

Hi Senate Judiciary,

The Criminal Stalker/Operative has one other point he wants to harass me over.  There were no findings and I did NOT agree to the entry of any order based on fraud and/or perjury.  The Court evidently believed that was an acceptable manner in which to obtain the fraud order.  I waived no objections whatsoever.  This order will be addressed in my RICO suit.  The fraud DMV order will be addressed as well.  DOJ and Senate Judiciary should engage in an extensive audit of VAWA funds in Los Angeles and LA Superior Court's attempt to extort domestic violence fines from me.  They're used to getting away with their criminal conduct.  That is entirely clear.

Kelley

From: Stephen Gianelli <stephengianelli@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, Dec 5, 2015 at 1:32 PM
Subject: Re: Implausible conspiracy theories
To: Kelley Lynch <kelley.lynch.2013@gmail.com>
Cc: alan hootnick <ahootnick@yahoo.com>

PS: No "findings" were required, because you agreed to the issuance of the Colorado order. Actually, "agreed" is not quite strong enough a word. According to the transcript, you REQUESTED the court to issue the permanent restraining order. The judge admonished you that you could not come back later and claim it was "fraudulent", that the order would be permanent, and that if you violated it by contacting Cohen for any reason you could be sentenced to 18-months in jail PER VIOLATION. At that point you reiterated your request for the issuance of the order. The judge issued the order, and you then THANKED HER! SORRY, BUT BY APPEARING AT THE HEARING AND THEN STIPULATING TO THE ISSUANCE OF THE ORDER, YOU LEGALLY WAIVED ANY OBJECTIONS THERETO - INCLUDING BASED ON THE LACK OF FINDINGS.  

On Sat, Dec 5, 2015 at 1:39 PM, Kelley Lynch <kelley.lynch.2013@gmail.com> wrote:

IRS, FBI, and DOJ,

I was very clear with the Boulder Combined Court that I would attack the order, issued without findings, if it was based on fraud and/or perjury.  It was and I discovered Cohen's entirely perjured declaration after the trial.  It doesn't matter what the order says.  The Boulder Combined Court continuously advised me, and others, that the fraudulent "permanent" order expired on February 15, 2009.  That's inconvenient for the Operative Stalker.  I testified that I believed the order expired.  I wasn't the lawyer asking me questions so I tend to doubt I could have gotten off the stand and asked myself the questions.  Furthermore, my lawyer told me the judge refused to permit us to attack the Colorado order, etc.  The jurors wanted to hear from IRS.  One juror relied on the prosecutors lies about corporate assets.  I've explained this ad nauseum.  Actually, Paulette Brandt testified that she was told the order expired on February 15, 2009 - before LA Superior Court - approximately four months before Boulder Combined Court wrote that the order was NOT a domestic violence order and provided a copy of their database showing that an order expired on February 15, 2009.  Berkeley PD was well aware that I had no idea an order was in place.  Even they didn't understand what order was being referred to.  Berkeley PD would like FBI to contact them.  

My lawyers spoke to the jurors.  My lawyer felt there may have been a "jury plant" and that is a very serious issue.  My lawyer advised me:  City Attorney is attempting to sabotage IRS; discredit me; and DA doesn't want the Spector verdict overturned.  My appellate attorney wrote that my trial was an IRS tax fraud case (related to Cohen) and should be investigated as such by IRS. The City Attorney LIED to the jurors about federal tax matters and told the jurors I am in receipt of it.  I am not and neither is IRS or FTB.  She said the tax fraud is a ruse.  No it's not.  I have Kory's memorandum - and the tax returns - proving that Cohen and his representatives failed to report $8 million in gross income.  Cohen has embezzled approximately $6.7 million from TH alone.  That issue has not been litigated.  

Gianelli is a criminal, moonlighting for Cohen and probably the Spector prosecution, and belongs in prison.  That's a fact.  He has engaged in egregious criminal witness tampering and targeted witnesses.  That would include, but is not limited to, my sons for years.  That's evidently just fine with LA Superior Court and the powers that be in Los Angeles.  In fact, the prosecutor felt it was fine that someone who could be a sexual predator (or serial murderer) for all I know was targeting my then minor son.  Indecent exposure is cool with the powers that be in LA Confidential.  That conduct annoys the perp.

Cohen testified that I never stole from him and we were in a purely business relationship.  The City Attorney elicited the testimony about Phil Spector and a gun with the DA's investigator in the courtroom and witnessed lunching with Cohen.  Cohen testified that he was a recipient on the email to Dennis Riordan.  He lied and was not.  Leonard Cohen has used fraud and perjury to obtain verdicts, judgments, and orders.  LA Superior Court condones that conduct and local government actors are all over a federal tax matter.  

The criminal has been advised to cease and desist.

Kelley

http://riverdeepbook.blogspot.com/2015/07/declaration-of-john-rutger-penick-filed.html

http://riverdeepbook.blogspot.com/2014/09/ray-charles-lindsey-kelley-lynchs-son.html

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Stephen Gianelli <stephengianelli@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, Dec 5, 2015 at 1:27 PM
Subject: Re: Implausible conspiracy theories
To: Kelley Lynch <kelley.lynch.2013@gmail.com>

Cc: alan hootnick <ahootnick@yahoo.com>

1. Regardless of why Cohen arrived in Boulder or how he got there, you were given an opportunity to have a hearing on whether the permanent order should issue. You initially said yes, you wanted an evidentiary hearing. Cohen counsel called you to the stand. After a few minutes of cross-examination, you told the court that you wanted to end the hearing and simply agree to the issuance of the permanent order. The judge admonished you of the consequences and you said you understood so the judge issued the order at your request, then served it on you in open court. You signed for the order. Right on its face, the order says in 18-point bold type in a prominent box "this protection order NEVER EXPIRES".

2. You did NOT testify at your 2012 criminal trial that you phoned the Colorado court before you emailed and telephoned Cohen and were told that the order had expired. Rather, you testified that you ASSUMED that it had expired, because "permanent" orders in California have an expiration date. The jury did not believe you.

3. Apparently, AFTER your conviction and you moved in with Paulette Brandt, you and Paulette CLAIM that you called the Colorado court and were told the order expired. First, the order did not expire. Protection orders in Colorado last until the restrained person files a motion to terminate the order, and must fill out a fingerprint card so the court can obtain an FBI rap sheet to see if the restrained person has been convicted of any crime involving the protected person as a victim. At that point the restrained person loses all right to ever ask that the order be set aside.

4. Since you and Paulette claim to have been told the Colorado order expired AFTER your criminal trial, that is IRRELEVANT to your state of mind at the time you violated the order.

5. The emails you sent to Cohen "came up" at your trial because they proved that you violated the Colorado order by sending them, and for no other reason.

6. Did you speak to any of your jurors? I doubt it, you were in custody before, during and after your trial. While one or more jurors may have told your attorneys or their investigator that they would have been interested in hearing from the IRS, that evidence would not have changed the core truth that you sent emails and transmitted voice mails to Cohen while a Colorado protection order prohibited you from doing so. WHY you violated the order is not a defense. You would have been convicted anyway, as noted by the LA Superior Court Appellate Department opinion affirming your conviction on appeal.

7. YOU are the one who has called these things a "conspiracy" not me, including on December 4, 2015 in a blog post with THIS HEADING: "The Ongoing Overlapping Legal Conspiracies...".

In the body of the email, you state in part:

"You attempt to infiltrate matters, elicit information, threaten and intimidate witnesses, and are engaged in an ongoing campaign of harassment that involves overlapping legal conspiracies related to Leonard Cohen and Phil Spector."

These are not "facts". It's crazy talk.

Kelley Lynch's Email to IRS, FBI & DOJ Re. The Criminal Stalker's Ongoing Harassment Over Leonard Cohen, Phil Spector, Fraud Restraining Orders, Tax Fraud, Etc.

From: Kelley Lynch <kelley.lynch.2013@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, Dec 5, 2015 at 1:39 PM
Subject: Fwd: Implausible conspiracy theories
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 <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>, tips@radaronline.com, alan hootnick <ahootnick@yahoo.com>

IRS, FBI, and DOJ,

I was very clear with the Boulder Combined Court that I would attack the order, issued without findings, if it was based on fraud and/or perjury.  It was and I discovered Cohen's entirely perjured declaration after the trial.  It doesn't matter what the order says.  The Boulder Combined Court continuously advised me, and others, that the fraudulent "permanent" order expired on February 15, 2009.  That's inconvenient for the Operative Stalker.  I testified that I believed the order expired.  I wasn't the lawyer asking me questions so I tend to doubt I could have gotten off the stand and asked myself the questions.  Furthermore, my lawyer told me the judge refused to permit us to attack the Colorado order, etc.  The jurors wanted to hear from IRS.  One juror relied on the prosecutors lies about corporate assets.  I've explained this ad nauseum.  Actually, Paulette Brandt testified that she was told the order expired on February 15, 2009 - before LA Superior Court - approximately four months before Boulder Combined Court wrote that the order was NOT a domestic violence order and provided a copy of their database showing that an order expired on February 15, 2009.  Berkeley PD was well aware that I had no idea an order was in place.  Even they didn't understand what order was being referred to.  Berkeley PD would like FBI to contact them.  

My lawyers spoke to the jurors.  My lawyer felt there may have been a "jury plant" and that is a very serious issue.  My lawyer advised me:  City Attorney is attempting to sabotage IRS; discredit me; and DA doesn't want the Spector verdict overturned.  My appellate attorney wrote that my trial was an IRS tax fraud case (related to Cohen) and should be investigated as such by IRS. The City Attorney LIED to the jurors about federal tax matters and told the jurors I am in receipt of it.  I am not and neither is IRS or FTB.  She said the tax fraud is a ruse.  No it's not.  I have Kory's memorandum - and the tax returns - proving that Cohen and his representatives failed to report $8 million in gross income.  Cohen has embezzled approximately $6.7 million from TH alone.  That issue has not been litigated.  

Gianelli is a criminal, moonlighting for Cohen and probably the Spector prosecution, and belongs in prison.  That's a fact.  He has engaged in egregious criminal witness tampering and targeted witnesses.  That would include, but is not limited to, my sons for years.  That's evidently just fine with LA Superior Court and the powers that be in Los Angeles.  In fact, the prosecutor felt it was fine that someone who could be a sexual predator (or serial murderer) for all I know was targeting my then minor son.  Indecent exposure is cool with the powers that be in LA Confidential.  That conduct annoys the perp.

Cohen testified that I never stole from him and we were in a purely business relationship.  The City Attorney elicited the testimony about Phil Spector and a gun with the DA's investigator in the courtroom and witnessed lunching with Cohen.  Cohen testified that he was a recipient on the email to Dennis Riordan.  He lied and was not.  Leonard Cohen has used fraud and perjury to obtain verdicts, judgments, and orders.  LA Superior Court condones that conduct and local government actors are all over a federal tax matter.  

The criminal has been advised to cease and desist.

Kelley

http://riverdeepbook.blogspot.com/2015/07/declaration-of-john-rutger-penick-filed.html

http://riverdeepbook.blogspot.com/2014/09/ray-charles-lindsey-kelley-lynchs-son.html

KELLEY LYNCH TESTIMONY:

PD:  Okay.  Did you believe that the order in Colorado had expired?
Lynch:  Yes, I did.  RT 476

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Stephen Gianelli <stephengianelli@gmail.com>Date: Sat, Dec 5, 2015 at 1:27 PM
Subject: Re: Implausible conspiracy theories
To: Kelley Lynch <kelley.lynch.2013@gmail.com>

Cc: alan hootnick <ahootnick@yahoo.com>

1. Regardless of why Cohen arrived in Boulder or how he got there, you were given an opportunity to have a hearing on whether the permanent order should issue. You initially said yes, you wanted an evidentiary hearing. Cohen counsel called you to the stand. After a few minutes of cross-examination, you told the court that you wanted to end the hearing and simply agree to the issuance of the permanent order. The judge admonished you of the consequences and you said you understood so the judge issued the order at your request, then served it on you in open court. You signed for the order. Right on its face, the order says in 18-point bold type in a prominent box "this protection order NEVER EXPIRES".

2. You did NOT testify at your 2012 criminal trial that you phoned the Colorado court before you emailed and telephoned Cohen and were told that the order had expired. Rather, you testified that you ASSUMED that it had expired, because "permanent" orders in California have an expiration date. The jury did not believe you.

3. Apparently, AFTER your conviction and you moved in with Paulette Brandt, you and Paulette CLAIM that you called the Colorado court and were told the order expired. First, the order did not expire. Protection orders in Colorado last until the restrained person files a motion to terminate the order, and must fill out a fingerprint card so the court can obtain an FBI rap sheet to see if the restrained person has been convicted of any crime involving the protected person as a victim. At that point the restrained person loses all right to ever ask that the order be set aside.

4. Since you and Paulette claim to have been told the Colorado order expired AFTER your criminal trial, that is IRRELEVANT to your state of mind at the time you violated the order.

5. The emails you sent to Cohen "came up" at your trial because they proved that you violated the Colorado order by sending them, and for no other reason.

6. Did you speak to any of your jurors? I doubt it, you were in custody before, during and after your trial. While one or more jurors may have told your attorneys or their investigator that they would have been interested in hearing from the IRS, that evidence would not have changed the core truth that you sent emails and transmitted voice mails to Cohen while a Colorado protection order prohibited you from doing so. WHY you violated the order is not a defense. You would have been convicted anyway, as noted by the LA Superior Court Appellate Department opinion affirming your conviction on appeal.

7. YOU are the one who has called these things a "conspiracy" not me, including on December 4, 2015 in a blog post with THIS HEADING: "The Ongoing Overlapping Legal Conspiracies...".

In the body of the email, you state in part:

"You attempt to infiltrate matters, elicit information, threaten and intimidate witnesses, and are engaged in an ongoing campaign of harassment that involves overlapping legal conspiracies related to Leonard Cohen and Phil Spector."

These are not "facts". It's crazy talk.

On Sat, Dec 5, 2015 at 10:54 PM, Kelley Lynch <kelley.lynch.2013@gmail.com> wrote:

Stephen Gianelli,

I have advised you to cease and desist.  I didn't agree to any order based on fraud and perjury and was clear with the Court about that fact.  The Colorado order was issued without findings.  Cohen attempted to silence me and made a desperate flight into Colorado during his European tour - after threatening Ann Diamond over her article.  Boulder Combined Court advised me, and others, that the permanent order expired on February 15, 2009.  That is a very serious legal issue.  Cohen then fraudulently registered the Colorado order as a "domestic violence order."  That is a new order and I wasn't served or notified.  This issue will be addressed in my RICO suits and I have asked DOJ and Senate Judiciary to investigate the VAWA funding fraud and use of fraud restraining orders to prevent me from requesting IRS required tax and corporate information (including K-1s, corporate accountings, etc.).  City Attorney lied about federal tax matters and seemed focused on the criminal and illegal K-1s Cohen's wholly owned entity (LC Investments, LLC) transmitted to IRS showing $0 income and proving the fraud ledger is evidence of financial fraud.  This information was transmitted to IRS and there is no litigation privilege with respect to the fraud tax refunds Cohen obtained.  

Actually, the jurors wanted to hear from IRS.  The judge prevented that but clearly they felt they were hearing a federal tax case related to Cohen.  One juror relied on Streeter's lies about corporate assets.  Leonard Cohen borrowed, or caused to be expended, approximately $6.7 million from his alleged "retirement" account.  His lawyers, for his benefit, extinguished the annuity obligation on the 2003 returns so the fabricated lawsuit makes no sense in any event.  It was merely Cohen's defense to the allegations that he committed criminal tax fraud; retaliation for reporting his criminal tax fraud to IRS; and Cohen's way to confront Greenberg's allegations that Cohen and Kory engaged in extortion, criminal conspiracy, witness tampering, etc.  You are now engaged in criminal witness tampering and the issues relate to Cohen and Spector.  You worked with Michelle Blaine, who stole $1 million from Spector, to target my email accounts and blogs.  You attempt to infiltrate, elicit information, interfere with matters (including the Tax Court matter), and witness tamper.

The Spector gun incident arose because the DA re-election campaign was an issue.  David Mamet had publicly stated that he felt Spector was railroaded.  There was most definitely a quid pro quo with the DA and Cohen.  That's why Cohen was on the stand testifying about Spector and a gun.  He now has three versions of his bullshit gun story about Phil Spector before LA Superior Court.  The version he testified about contradicts the version Spector's prosecutors used in their motions in limine and - according to Mick Brown who reviewed the Grand Jury transcripts - with the Spector Grand Jury.  The prosecutor elicited Cohen's testimony about Spector and a gun using an email to Dennis Riordan.  Cohen wasn't copied on that and lied that he was.  The prosecutor concealed the portion of the email thread to IRS Commissioner's Staff and about legitimate tax information.  LAPD's report concluded that my alleged emails were generally requests for tax information.  That report will be submitted to federal court.

These aren't conspiracies.  They're facts.  The only conspiracy issue here is the photograph you routinely sent me and then uploaded to the Tax Court evidence blog that was tampered with, altered, etc.  That will now be addressed with Tax Court.  You have advised me that you use TOR and no one could ever prove it was you.  I disagree and will ask Tax Court to refer this matter to federal law enforcement for an investigation.  

The prosecutors in the Spector case should be concerned that they could end up in prison for what they have done here.  I think it's obvious that Phil Spector was set up using a fabricated narrative.  What's impossible to believe is that you are not on someone's payroll, moonlighting for Spector's prosecutors, and representing Leonard Cohen's legal issues.

Do the names Annabelle Balle and Jim Blyth ring a bell?  Looks like more insanity with respect to the online campaign to slander and discredit people; argue Spector's prosecutor's inane theories; and attack people who support Spector.

Cease and desist, criminal.

Kelley Lynch

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Stephen Gianelli <stephengianelli@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, Dec 5, 2015 at 10:35 AM
Subject: Re: Implausible conspiracy theories
To: Kelley Lynch <kelley.lynch.2013@gmail.com>

Look, Ms. Lynch, the big picture re your criminal trial is that there was a restraining order THAT YOU AGREED TO that prevented you from contacting Leonard Cohen. You violated that order with voice messages and emails. There was no viable defense.

The entire IRS criminal division could have testified and it would have not made any difference.

The "gun incidents" came up at your trial because YOU sent emails on that subject to Cohen IN VIOLATION OF THE RESTRAINING ORDER and those (and other) emails and voice mails were all part of the evidence that you violated the order. That was the only significance. It did not matter whether your allegations were true or false. The only relevance was that you SENT THEM in VIOLATION OF THE ORDER.

But on the subject of your RICO suit, and your claim of "overlapping conspiracies", your contention that you were essentially framed on criminal charges because the prosecution was "afraid of the Phil Spector murder verdict being reversed" does not even make sense. Convicting  you had NO EFFECT ON SPECTOR'S PENDING APPEAL. Acquitting you would have had NO EFFECT ON SPECTOR'S PENDING APPEAL. One had nothing to do with the other.

Therefore, your "conspiracy" theory is not only "implausible" it is IMPOSSIBLE. 

On Sat, Dec 5, 2015 at 7:24 PM, Kelley Lynch <kelley.lynch.2013@gmail.com> wrote:

Stephen Gianelli,

Attempting to spin the situation re. my trial.  The City Attorney, working with the DA, elicited information about Phil Spector and a gun.  That was done by elicting perjured testimony from Cohen about an email I sent to Dennis Riordan.  Cohen wasn't a recipient but lied when he testified that he was.  I wasn't part of the Spector trial and have never said I had any role in the appeal.  Nor did I say that Cohen did.  Mick Brown, UK Telegraph, reviewed the Spector Grand Jury Testimony and said Cohen's testimony/statements were presented.  I reviewed the prosecution's motions in the Spector case and they did indeed use a "prior bad act" gun story of Cohen's.  That was contradicted by Cohen's testimony during my trial and further contradicted by Cohen's email to my alleged prosecutor who wrote about the Grand Jury but failed to provide my lawyers with Brady materials;  the unsealed Grand Jury transcript.

Thinking of the photograph you uploaded to my Tax Court Petition evidence blog again, Gianelli?  I agree that there are people involved in this matter that resemble escapees from a criminal insane asylum.  Did you create the monker "Anabelle Baile" as well?  Suddenly, she wants to become my friend on Facebook?  How coincidential.  Sounds like your blog, Kelly Green (HATES Cutler), Mongochili, 14th Sheepdog.  

Tell your buddies, the only conspiracy here is the set up of Phil Spector and Cohen's criminal tax fraud, theft, etc.  No tin foil hats needed.  They're cut throats in suits.

Cease and desist.

Kelley Lynch

Kelley Lynch's Email to LA Confidential's Operative Proxy Stalker & Liar

From: Kelley Lynch <kelley.lynch.2013@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, Dec 5, 2015 at 12:54 PM
Subject: Fwd: Implausible conspiracy theories
To: Stephen Gianelli <stephengianelli@gmail.com>, "*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 <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>, tips@radaronline.com, alan hootnick <ahootnick@yahoo.com>, Fabian Paulmikell A <Paulmikell.A.Fabian@irscounsel.treas.gov>

Stephen Gianelli,

I have advised you to cease and desist.  I didn't agree to any order based on fraud and perjury and was clear with the Court about that fact.  The Colorado order was issued without findings.  Cohen attempted to silence me and made a desperate flight into Colorado during his European tour - after threatening Ann Diamond over her article.  Boulder Combined Court advised me, and others, that the permanent order expired on February 15, 2009.  That is a very serious legal issue.  Cohen then fraudulently registered the Colorado order as a "domestic violence order."  That is a new order and I wasn't served or notified.  This issue will be addressed in my RICO suits and I have asked DOJ and Senate Judiciary to investigate the VAWA funding fraud and use of fraud restraining orders to prevent me from requesting IRS required tax and corporate information (including K-1s, corporate accountings, etc.).  City Attorney lied about federal tax matters and seemed focused on the criminal and illegal K-1s Cohen's wholly owned entity (LC Investments, LLC) transmitted to IRS showing $0 income and proving the fraud ledger is evidence of financial fraud.  This information was transmitted to IRS and there is no litigation privilege with respect to the fraud tax refunds Cohen obtained.  

Actually, the jurors wanted to hear from IRS.  The judge prevented that but clearly they felt they were hearing a federal tax case related to Cohen.  One juror relied on Streeter's lies about corporate assets.  Leonard Cohen borrowed, or caused to be expended, approximately $6.7 million from his alleged "retirement" account.  His lawyers, for his benefit, extinguished the annuity obligation on the 2003 returns so the fabricated lawsuit makes no sense in any event.  It was merely Cohen's defense to the allegations that he committed criminal tax fraud; retaliation for reporting his criminal tax fraud to IRS; and Cohen's way to confront Greenberg's allegations that Cohen and Kory engaged in extortion, criminal conspiracy, witness tampering, etc.  You are now engaged in criminal witness tampering and the issues relate to Cohen and Spector.  You worked with Michelle Blaine, who stole $1 million from Spector, to target my email accounts and blogs.  You attempt to infiltrate, elicit information, interfere with matters (including the Tax Court matter), and witness tamper.

The Spector gun incident arose because the DA re-election campaign was an issue.  David Mamet had publicly stated that he felt Spector was railroaded.  There was most definitely a quid pro quo with the DA and Cohen.  That's why Cohen was on the stand testifying about Spector and a gun.  He now has three versions of his bullshit gun story about Phil Spector before LA Superior Court.  The version he testified about contradicts the version Spector's prosecutors used in their motions in limine and - according to Mick Brown who reviewed the Grand Jury transcripts - with the Spector Grand Jury.  The prosecutor elicited Cohen's testimony about Spector and a gun using an email to Dennis Riordan.  Cohen wasn't copied on that and lied that he was.  The prosecutor concealed the portion of the email thread to IRS Commissioner's Staff and about legitimate tax information.  LAPD's report concluded that my alleged emails were generally requests for tax information.  That report will be submitted to federal court.

These aren't conspiracies.  They're facts.  The only conspiracy issue here is the photograph you routinely sent me and then uploaded to the Tax Court evidence blog that was tampered with, altered, etc.  That will now be addressed with Tax Court.  You have advised me that you use TOR and no one could ever prove it was you.  I disagree and will ask Tax Court to refer this matter to federal law enforcement for an investigation.  

The prosecutors in the Spector case should be concerned that they could end up in prison for what they have done here.  I think it's obvious that Phil Spector was set up using a fabricated narrative.  What's impossible to believe is that you are not on someone's payroll, moonlighting for Spector's prosecutors, and representing Leonard Cohen's legal issues.

Do the names Annabelle Balle and Jim Blyth ring a bell?  Looks like more insanity with respect to the online campaign to slander and discredit people; argue Spector's prosecutor's inane theories; and attack people who support Spector.

Cease and desist, criminal.

Kelley Lynch

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Stephen Gianelli <stephengianelli@gmail.com>

Date: Sat, Dec 5, 2015 at 10:35 AM
Subject: Re: Implausible conspiracy theories
To: Kelley Lynch <kelley.lynch.2013@gmail.com>

Look, Ms. Lynch, the big picture re your criminal trial is that there was a restraining order THAT YOU AGREED TO that prevented you from contacting Leonard Cohen. You violated that order with voice messages and emails. There was no viable defense.

The entire IRS criminal division could have testified and it would have not made any difference.

The "gun incidents" came up at your trial because YOU sent emails on that subject to Cohen IN VIOLATION OF THE RESTRAINING ORDER and those (and other) emails and voice mails were all part of the evidence that you violated the order. That was the only significance. It did not matter whether your allegations were true or false. The only relevance was that you SENT THEM in VIOLATION OF THE ORDER.

But on the subject of your RICO suit, and your claim of "overlapping conspiracies", your contention that you were essentially framed on criminal charges because the prosecution was "afraid of the Phil Spector murder verdict being reversed" does not even make sense. Convicting  you had NO EFFECT ON SPECTOR'S PENDING APPEAL. Acquitting you would have had NO EFFECT ON SPECTOR'S PENDING APPEAL. One had nothing to do with the other.

Therefore, your "conspiracy" theory is not only "implausible" it is IMPOSSIBLE. 

On Sat, Dec 5, 2015 at 7:24 PM, Kelley Lynch <kelley.lynch.2013@gmail.com> wrote:

Stephen Gianelli,

Attempting to spin the situation re. my trial.  The City Attorney, working with the DA, elicited information about Phil Spector and a gun.  That was done by elicting perjured testimony from Cohen about an email I sent to Dennis Riordan.  Cohen wasn't a recipient but lied when he testified that he was.  I wasn't part of the Spector trial and have never said I had any role in the appeal.  Nor did I say that Cohen did.  Mick Brown, UK Telegraph, reviewed the Spector Grand Jury Testimony and said Cohen's testimony/statements were presented.  I reviewed the prosecution's motions in the Spector case and they did indeed use a "prior bad act" gun story of Cohen's.  That was contradicted by Cohen's testimony during my trial and further contradicted by Cohen's email to my alleged prosecutor who wrote about the Grand Jury but failed to provide my lawyers with Brady materials;  the unsealed Grand Jury transcript.

Thinking of the photograph you uploaded to my Tax Court Petition evidence blog again, Gianelli?  I agree that there are people involved in this matter that resemble escapees from a criminal insane asylum.  Did you create the monker "Anabelle Baile" as well?  Suddenly, she wants to become my friend on Facebook?  How coincidential.  Sounds like your blog, Kelly Green (HATES Cutler), Mongochili, 14th Sheepdog.  

Tell your buddies, the only conspiracy here is the set up of Phil Spector and Cohen's criminal tax fraud, theft, etc.  No tin foil hats needed.  They're cut throats in suits.

Cease and desist.

Kelley Lynch

Annabelle Balle Alan Hootnick are you an attorney? This is good news?

Like · Reply · 1 · 3 December at 14:54

Alan Hootnick well, Dennis Riordan is the best appeals lawyer in California, and he has a good record of winning appeals in the 9th Circuit Court

Annabelle Balle Alan Hootnick are you an attorney? This is good news?

Like · Reply · 1 · 3 December at 14:54

Alan Hootnick well, Dennis Riordan is the best appeals lawyer in California, and he has a good record of winning appeals in the 9th Circuit Court

https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=957198657665872&id=327647197287691&comment_id=1030624026990001&notif_t=like

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Stephen Gianelli <stephengianelli@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, Dec 5, 2015 at 6:58 AM
Subject: Implausible conspiracy theories
To: Kelley Lynch <kelley.lynch.2013@gmail.com>

Let's set aside the implausibility of the current City Attorney (let alone Leonard Cohen, Kory, or Rice) caring one way or the other about whether Phil Spector's prior appeal or current  habeas proceding resulted in a new trial. 

There is no way in hell that the outcome of your 2012 criminal trial and/or related appeal could have affected the habreas peition filed in the Spector matter or the outcome of Spector's earlier direct appeal from his murder conviction. That is utterly impossible. 

Therefore, your attempt to link the two cases through an alleged "overpaping, ongoing conspiracy" is inherently implausible. You might as well allege that little green men beamed into court and tampered with the verdict that convicted you. 

If you can't see even that, you are indeed mentally ill.

Sent from my BlackBerry 10 smartphone.

‎

The Ongoing Overlapping Legal Conspiracies & The Proxy's Role In Harassment, Witness Tampering, Witness Intimidation, Slander, Etc.

From: Kelley Lynch <kelley.lynch.2013@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, Dec 4, 2015 at 11:58 AM
Subject: Fwd:
To: Stephen Gianelli <stephengianelli@gmail.com>, "*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 <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>, tips@radaronline.com, Fabian Paulmikell A <Paulmikell.A.Fabian@irscounsel.treas.gov>, alan hootnick <ahootnick@yahoo.com>

Stephen Gianelli,

I have relentlessly advised you to cease and desist.  Lying to IRS, FBI, DOJ, and other government agencies, while slandering me, is not providing me with information.  Furthermore, you do not represent me.  You attempt to infiltrate matters, elicit information, threaten and intimidate witnesses, and are engaged in an ongoing campaign of harassment that involves overlapping legal conspiracies related to Leonard Cohen and Phil Spector.  You, Michelle Blaine, Susanne Walsh and others have engaged in witness tampering by proxy and targeted witnesses.  That would include, but is not limited to my sons whose declarations (signed by them personally) have been submitted to numerous courts.  You continue to attempt to interfere with the Tax Court case and are now criminally harassing me over the RICO suits I intend to file against Cohen a well as the City and County of Los Angeles.  No one is offering you any advice apart from advising you to cease and desist.  Other people have gone to law enforcement, sought legal advice, or had their attorney advise you to cease and desist.  I suppose you were offering Francisco Suarez legal advice when you criminally harassed him for over a year.

You are the individual who began writing and lying about me to Streeter - not I.  She used it as an opportunity to retaliate.  Swanigan then instructed you to continue harassing me.  Rice has instructed you to harass and provoke me.  

You belong in prison and I have been clear with IRS, FBI, and DOJ about that fact.

Kelley Lynch

http://riverdeepbook.blogspot.com/2015/07/declaration-of-john-rutger-penick-filed.html

http://riverdeepbook.blogspot.com/2014/09/ray-charles-lindsey-kelley-lynchs-son.html

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Stephen Gianelli <stephengianelli@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, Dec 4, 2015 at 11:42 AM
Subject: Re:
To: Kelley Lynch <kelley.lynch.2013@gmail.com>

Ms. Lynch,

It seems to me that I am supplying you with information, and not the other way around.

Clearly, you have no clue what you are doing - especially when it comes to court proceedings. You literally know nothing, and I therefore have nothing to learn from you.

If you chose to ignore the legal principles and authorities that stand in the way of your pending tax petition and threatened RICO action, that is up to you.

But you are absolutely the last person on Earth I would consult regarding anything legal.

Stephen Gianelli

Crete, Greece

On Fri, Dec 4, 2015 at 8:22 PM, Kelley Lynch <kelley.lynch.2013@gmail.com> wrote:

IRS, FBI, and DOJ,

The Criminal Stalker wants information.  This is how he operates.  He's moved on from harassing me over the Tax Court matter for a moment.  I haven't received notice from Cohen, City, or County that this Criminal will formally represent them.  

Kelley

On Fri, Dec 4, 2015 at 10:21 AM, Kelley Lynch <kelley.lynch.2013@gmail.com> wrote:

Stephen Gianellli,

Cease and desist.  I have no evidence that you are formally representing Cohen, City of Los Angeles, or County of Los Angeles re.the RICO suits I will be filing in the near future.  It is overwhelming obvious that you are attempting to elicit information and working on Cohen, et al's defense.  

I have been very clear with IRS, FBI, DOJ, and others that you belong in prison for this ongoing criminal harassment, targeting of my sons, and so forth.  

Kelley Lynch

From: Stephen R. Gianelli <stephengianelli@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, Dec 4, 2015 at 8:28 AM
Subject: Personal harm or injury does not give rise to standing to sue for an alleged RICO VIOLATION
To: kelley.lynch.2013@gmail.com
Cc: ahootnick@yahoo.com

Ms. Lynch,

Another point you have over looked concerns the fact that any business or economic injury you suffered (e.g., alleged “theft” of intellectual property rights, lost commission income, the loss of your alleged corporate shares and/or partnership interests) occurred no later than May of 2006 – when the Los Angeles Superior Court entered a $7M judgment in Cohen’s favor (well outside the 4-year statute of limitations period for private RICO actions). The alleged “illegal tax refunds” – regardless of when you discovered them – could not be considered damages that you sustained and even if “fraudulent” as you allege any injury flowing therefrom was suffered by the Unites States Treasury, not Kelley Lynch. The alleged injuries to your liberty interest (e.g., the “false arrest” and “wrongful conviction” and incarcerations you suffered in 2012 and in 2014) in connection with the criminal harassment and restraining order violation case against you and/or allegedly as a result from the alleged) “fraudulent” registration of the 2008 Colorado protection order against you in May of 2011 are in the nature of personal injury damages and not “business or property” in nature. The same is true of any reputational damage that you suffered in connection therewith.

The Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO) was created to combat the anticompetitive invasion of legitimate business interests by organized crime. As part of its legislative scheme to battle racketeers, Congress established criminal and civil penalties for RICO violations. Section 1964, the civil penalties section of RICO, permits both the government and private citizens to bring federal causes of action for RICO violations. Subsection § 1964(c) provides that a private citizen may file suit for treble damages when he is “injured in his business or property.” This “business or property” clause has generally been construed as a standing requirement, limiting the availability of RICO claims for potential plaintiffs. A personal injury that does not affect a business or property interest—emotional distress, for example—does not give rise to standing under § 1964(c) See Doe v Roe, 958 F2d 763, 767–68 (7th Cir 1992) [“[A]ll other courts construing this language have likewise concluded that a civil RICO action cannot be premised solely upon personal or emotional injuries.”] and See Martin Marietta Corp. v. Insurance Co. of North America (1995) 40 Cal. App. 4th 1113, 1124-1125 [the term “personal injury” embraces an injury flowing from or arising out of false arrest, detention or imprisonment as well as malicious prosecution].)

The above principles and authorities provide yet another basis for the dismissal of any “federal RICCO suit” you initiate as threatened against Cohen, Kory, Rice, the City of Los Angeles and/or the County of Los Angeles, based on lack of a plausible claim to “business or property” injuries and the resulting lack of standing to pursue a RICO claim.

Stephen Gianelli

Crete, Greece

From: Stephen R. Gianelli <stephengianelli@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, Dec 4, 2015 at 3:35 AM
Subject: fyi
To: kelley.lynch.2013@gmail.com

To state a claim under RICO, a plaintiff must allege (1) conduct (2) of an enterprise (3) through a pattern (4) of racketeering activity. 18 U.S.C § 1961, et seq.; Sedima, S.P.R.L. v. Imrex Co., 473 U.S. 479, 496 (1985); Sanford v. MemberWorks, Inc., 625 F.3d 550, 557-58 (9th Cir. 2010) (dismissal of pro se plaintiffs' RICO claim for lack of pleading predicate RICO violations). A RICO "plaintiff only has standing if, and can only recover to the extent that, he has been injured in his business or property by the conduct constituting the violation." Sedima, S.P.R.L. v. Imrex Co., Inc., 473 U.S. 479, 493 (1985).

Separate and apart from your allegations of “theft” regarding your alleged intellectual property and corporate and/or partnership interests through the default judgment in BC338322 in 2006 (well beyond the 4-year limitations period for civil RICO) you have no economic damages.

From: Stephen R. Gianelli <stephengianelli@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, Dec 4, 2015 at 3:35 AM
Subject: FYI - Impremissble to collaterally attack the judgment state court judgment in BC338322 in a federal filing
To: kelley.lynch.2013@gmail.com

““As courts of original jurisdiction, federal district courts have no authority to review the final determinations of a state court in judicial proceedings.”  Branson v. Nott, 62 F.3d 287, 291 (9th Cir.1995).   This legal theory, commonly referred to as the Rooker-Feldman doctrine, precludes federal adjudication of a claim that “amounts to nothing more than an impermissible collateral attack on prior state court decisions.”  Id. (citing MacKay v. Pfeil, 827 F.2d 540, 543 (9th Cir.1987)).   The doctrine also precludes constitutional claims that are “inextricably intertwined” with the forbidden appeal.

[…]

“Accordingly, because the complaint is nothing more than another attack on the California superior court's determination in Ignacio's domestic case and the related determinations made by the federal courts that they lack subject matter jurisdiction, the district court properly dismissed the case.

“The district court's dismissal of Ignacio's lawsuit is affirmed.   We conclude that under the rule of necessity we may entertain Ignacio's appeal.   We conclude also that the district court determined properly that it had no subject matter jurisdiction to consider the action because Ignacio's claims amounted to collateral attacks on a state court determination.”

 

Source: Noel v. Hall, 341 F.3d 1148, 1157 (9th Cir.2003). http://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-9th-circuit/1301225.html#sthash.N4PCMvi3.dpuf