These are
the latest harassing emails from the Stalker/Co-conspirator. The District Court has jurisdiction to hear
this case that is not simply “complaining” about a state court judgment. I wonder how much time has to pass before
Cohen feels he needs to serve me the summons and complaint which I have not
been served to date. The allegations of
racketeering are plausible.
Nevertheless, we are interested to see how much perjury and fraud is
acceptable to our court system.
Gianelli’s excuse for why he is harassing me is pathetic. Are these the reasons he terrorized my sons for seven straight years; harassed everyone in my life; targeted, slandered and intimidated witnesses; and has vehemently attacked Paulette Brandt? This man has engaged in criminal conduct and that does not give him the right to continue with that conduct.
Gianelli’s excuse for why he is harassing me is pathetic. Are these the reasons he terrorized my sons for seven straight years; harassed everyone in my life; targeted, slandered and intimidated witnesses; and has vehemently attacked Paulette Brandt? This man has engaged in criminal conduct and that does not give him the right to continue with that conduct.
I
was not fired for theft in 2004. The
issue never arose. Cohen demanded that I
hand over the corporate books and records, meet with him and his lawyer, and
unravel these entities/transactions. I
refused. I also turned down millions of
dollars in settlement offers due to the fact that I was being asked to lie about
Cohen’s representatives. Nothing about
this situation is common sense to a reasonable person. Gianelli is a lawyer who represents Leonard
Cohen’s legal interests.
I
most certainly do not know that my RICO suit is about to be dismissed and if
that is the case, it will be appealed.
Furthermore, it will not be the end of the story with respect to the
federal tax matters that have been implicated.
Kelley
_____________________________________________________________________________
From: STEPHEN R. GIANELLI <stephengianelli@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, May 13, 2016 at 7:56 AM
Subject:
To: blind <distribution@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, May 13, 2016 at 7:56 AM
Subject:
To: blind <distribution@gmail.com>
You just don’t get it. It is not the quantity of “fraud” you
have alleged (“we are all curious to see how much fraud is enough”) it is a
question of the district court’s jurisdiction to hear a case complaining about
a state court judgment, the passage of time involved, the lack of plausible
allegations of racketeering, res judicata and other fatal issues.
From: STEPHEN R. GIANELLI <stephengianelli@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, May 13, 2016 at 4:07 AM
Subject:
To: blind <distribution@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, May 13, 2016 at 4:07 AM
Subject:
To: blind <distribution@gmail.com>
Sorry, I misspoke, of course your suit will be dismissed WITH
prejudice.
From: STEPHEN R. GIANELLI <stephengianelli@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, May 13, 2016 at 3:53 AM
Subject:
To: blind <distribution@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, May 13, 2016 at 3:53 AM
Subject:
To: blind <distribution@gmail.com>
No, I do not think I am Leonard Cohen (as I have made quite
clear).
I think I am a retired guy whom you relentlessly harassed,
inserted into your invested conspiracy theories, falsely reported to the
IRS/FBI for all manner of made up offenses, and generally pissed off.
Now instead of cowering in a corner hoping in vain you go away
like your typical harassment victim I am all up in your shit citing chapter and
verse why all of your legal theories and successive court filings (to
understate it) lack viability.
I am 10 for 10.
Not that it is rocket science.
The fact that you cannot get fired for theft in 2004, get sued
for theft in 2005, sustain a judgment against you in 2006, wait until August of
2013 to move to set aside the default, file a second (unsuccessful)
motion to set aside the default 14 months later, then file a federal
court action asking for a determination of all of the issues raised by the 2005
complaint and 2006 judgment in 2016 is pretty much common
sense to any reasonable person.
I am a lawyer, so I supplied – chapter and verse – all of the
technical reasons why your 2016 250 page complaint (with 450 pages of physical
exhibits and hundreds more housed on your blog) will be dismissed ON THE
COURT’S OWN MOTION under section 1915 (e) BEFORE issuing a summons or bothering
the defendants with the suit, citing statutes, rules of court and federal cases
by volume, page number, and pinpoint citation page number and (where relevant)
also attaching and citing relevant hearing transcripts by page and line number.
Leonard Cohen does not even know about your suit.
When it is dismissed by the court WITHOUT PREJUDICE I will be
right for the 11th time in a row, and you will have been proven
TO be out in left field – AGAIN.
From: STEPHEN R. GIANELLI <stephengianelli@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, May 12, 2016 at 9:41 PM
Subject: RE: The Co-conspirator's Latest "Batch" of Harassing Emails
To: Kelley Lynch <kelley.lynch.2013@gmail.com>
Cc: PAULETTEBRANDT8@gmail.com
You are in no position to say on whose behalf I am writing. I am a
62 year old retired guy who lives in Europe and no one is paying me to set you
straight on your fantasy bullshit. I wish someone would pay me but they aren’t
and your assertion to the contrary is highly implausible, as is your conspiracy
theory. I would go so far as to say stupid (to employ a technical legal term).
As should be quite obvious to you I am not shy and have no
need to employ pseudonyms to communicate. Indeed, my email address has my full
name in it. Also I do not make threats. I simply do (or
not, as the case may be).
I am still licensed to practice law and as long as I am so
licensed, I took an oath to obey the law, always have and will continue to do
so.
From: STEPHEN R. GIANELLI <stephengianelli@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, May 12, 2016 at 10:04 PM
Subject: RE: The Co-conspirator's Latest "Batch" of Harassing Emails
To: blind <distribution@gmail.com>
Cc: alan hootnick <ahootnick@yahoo.com>, Kelley Lynch <kelley.lynch.2013@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, May 12, 2016 at 10:04 PM
Subject: RE: The Co-conspirator's Latest "Batch" of Harassing Emails
To: blind <distribution@gmail.com>
Cc: alan hootnick <ahootnick@yahoo.com>, Kelley Lynch <kelley.lynch.2013@gmail.com>
I do not speak for Ms. Rice (or Leonard Cohen), but there is no
need for ANYONE to direct any communications to the district court. No one has
been served yet; indeed no summons has been issued.
These are not “arguments” nor are they based on California law. I
am simply speaking legal truth. And I am not doing so on anyone’s behalf.
I have supplied you with volume and page citations to the federal
reports. (e.g., Reusser v. Wachovia Bank, N.A., 515 F.3d 855,
859-60 (9th Cir. 2008) – wherein the 9th Circuit held that
Rooker-Feldman bars a federal suit arising from a state court judgment where
the alleged “extrinsic fraud” was raised and rejected in the state court.)
Read those authorities or not and make up your own mind. But it
won’t change the fact that the district court is going to sua sponte dismiss
you case any day now.
‘
From: STEPHEN R. GIANELLI <stephengianelli@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, May 12, 2016 at 10:06 PM
Subject: RE: The Co-conspirator's Latest "Batch" of Harassing Emails
To: blind <distribution@gmail.com>
Obviously, you now know your RICO suit is about to be dismissed,
since you are now taking about the next frivolous lawsuit. Some people never
learn.
