Kelley Lynch
1754 N. Van Ness Avenue
Los Angeles, CA 90028
October 25, 2018
By USPS
Judge Dennis A Perluss, Presiding Judge
Second Appellate District
Division Seven
300 South Spring Street
2nd Floor
Los Angeles, California 90013
Re:
Leonard Norman Cohen vs. Kelley Lynch
Court of Appeal Case No. B267794
L.C. vs. K.L.
Court of Appeal Case No. B267409
Dear Judge Perluss:
I am writing in response to Wendy Lascher’s
letters to this Court dated October 10, 2018 with respect to the above
referenced cases.
Wendy Lascher does not represent my interests
and I did not authorize her to request a continuance of oral arguments due to
the retaliatory proceedings before Los Angeles Superior Court, Case No.
6CJ03685, related to deceased “protected” party, Leonard Cohen, and/or the
co-conspirators, Robert Kory and Michelle Rice that involves a very serious
federal tax controversy, obstruction of justice with respect to federal tax
matters and compliance with federal tax laws, and the use of the fraudulent
California and Colorado restraining orders to tamper with the administration of
those laws.
As set forth in the Natural Wealth suit,
filed with the U.S. District Court in Colorado on July 1, 2005, Leonard Cohen
and Robert Kory planned to use restraining orders to “crush” and “discredit” me
as a “witness.” This does not seem to be
a valid basis for the issuance of restraining orders. This allegation was raised six months prior
to Cohen obtaining his first civil harassment order against me. That order was not a domestic violence order
and therefore one must conclude that the nature of Cohen and my relationship,
which was purely business as set forth in the motion filed with the Boulder
Combined Court, changed at some time during the period of 2005 through May 25,
2011 when the fraudulent California domestic violence order was issued to Cohen
without minimal due process, service, notice, and/or a meaningful opportunity
to be heard. I would like to point out
that I did not see Leonard Cohen again, apart from legal proceedings before LA
Superior Court, since November 2004.
Leonard Cohen and I were not in a “dating” relationship. Sexual harassment and sexual assault are not
“dating” and California’s laws, as well as federal VAWA, have a statutory
relationship requirement. My lawyers
discussed the sexual harassment and so forth with Robert Kory as early as
January 2005. At that time, in front of
my lawyers and accountant, Robert Kory offered me “50% community
property.” I have steadfastly refused to
enter into any type of settlement agreement with Leonard Cohen due to his
conduct and the conduct of his representatives.
I find the issuance of the fraudulent California domestic violence
order, and particularly in light of the public’s interest in sexual harassment,
gravely offensive. I also take offense
at the government, without any jurisdiction whatsoever, assigning me a “dating”
or any other type of “relationship” with anyone.
145.
When these tactics to draw Lynch into his extortion scheme proved futile, Cohen
and
Kory – according to Lynch – turned to far more aggressive means to obtain her
cooperation.
Indeed,
as heard by other witnesses, Cohen and Kory vowed to "crush her," and
planned to use
restraining
orders and other means to prevent her from serving as a credible witness
regarding
both
Cohen's affairs and in regard to the scheme into which they had tried without
success to
draw
her. Natural Wealth Real Estate,
Inc., et al. vs. Leonard Cohen, et al, U.S. District Court, District of
Colorado, Civil Action No. 05-CV-01233-LTB-MJW.
Wendy
Lascher’s letters to this Court stated as follows: “I have just learned that a hearing is also
pending November 2 in criminal proceedings arising from appellant’s violation
of the restraining order protecting my client, Mr. Robert Kory, and trial
counsel, Ms. Rice.” Robert Kory and
Michelle Rice are not parties, protected or otherwise, to the Colorado and/or
California restraining orders at issue in these appeals and elsewhere. Leonard Cohen was and remains the sole
“protected” party. These orders have also
been used by the deceased “protected” party, his representatives, respondents,
and numerous government actors to criminalize compliance with federal tax laws and
pure speech related to federal tax matters, civil litigation, corporate record
inspection demands, demands for federal tax and corporate forms, and so
forth. This is not an appropriate use of
restraining orders from any point of view.
As this
Court requested that either appellant or respondent submit a copy of the
Complaint filed in Los Angeles Superior Court, Case No. BC338322, which led to
the fraudulent default judgment (and which has been used to defraud the US
Government, numerous states, corporations that the Court absolutely did not
obtain jurisdiction over, and me), I would like to ask the Court to review the
declaration I submitted to IRS in March 2015.
That declaration was submitted with evidence attached thereto, in both a
redacted and non-redacted form, in related Court of Appeal Case No. B265753. The same fraud upon the court addressed in
that case is now being used to respond to this appeal.
The fraud upon this court, LA Superior Court,
and at least two federal courts is unconscionable. I am now seeking representation to attack the
fraud upon the federal courts. The Los
Angeles Superior Court system does not appear to have a proper remedy for
“fraud upon the court.”The default judgment has been transmitted, together with
countless fraudulent legal pleadings, to the Internal Revenue Service and used
to obtain fraudulent tax refunds, amend Leonard Cohen’s personal tax returns,
and as a defense to wholly legitimate allegations related to tax fraud that I
have been advised is both civil and criminal in nature.
I would like to mention that no evidence has
been submitted to this Court that the fraudulent default judgment, fraudulent
renewal of the default judgment, and/or either fraudulent restraining order
were assigned to the Cohen Family Trust created solely for the purpose of
avoiding probate. None of the
corporations at issue were assigned to this trust. A formal estate has not been opened. Plaintiff LC Investments, LLC, was suspended
as of the date this appeal was filed. It
owned no assets whatsoever. Robert Kory
does not have standing with respect to these appeals.
I look forward to attending oral arguments
and, should any opposing counsel, attempt to deceive this Court, I will include
them in the fraud upon the court motion I intend to file with the Court of
Appeals.
Very
truly yours,
SIGNED
Kelley
Ann Lynch
P.S. As
the fraudulent restraining orders continue to prohibit me from communicating
with Kory & Rice, I have only served a copy upon Wendy Lascher.
cc:
IRS, FBI, DOJ, Senate Judiciary Finance Committee, and Wendy Lascher,
Esquire