Dissecting the Myth – A Takedown of I'm Your Man: The Life of Leonard Cohen by Sylvie Simmons

Sylvie Simmons’ biography I’m Your Man: The Life of Leonard Cohen has been widely celebrated as the definitive portrait of the late singer-songwriter. But a closer, forensic examination reveals something far more troubling: a carefully curated public relations hit campaign designed to whitewash Cohen’s legal and financial exposure, erase the role of key witnesses, and elevate fiction over fact. This post begins a line-by-line takedown of Simmons’ opening chapters, exposing how the biography leverages romanticized prose, selective omission, and literary misdirection to construct Cohen’s tax fraud defense narrative. Presented as truth, this "authorized" mythology—fed by Cohen, his lawyer Robert Kory, and Michelle Rice—obliterates the actual record, weaponizes false tropes, and helps silence Kelley Lynch, the manager and whistleblower with firsthand knowledge of the structures Cohen later misrepresented to courts and the IRS. Let’s begin with “The Cover Story.”

This blog post presents a comprehensive deconstruction of Sylvie Simmons' 2012 biography I'm Your Man: The Life of Leonard Cohen, exposing it as a reputational laundering device rather than a legitimate biographical work. Marketed as an intimate portrait of the artist, the book in fact operates as a strategic extension of Cohen’s legal and public relations defense, designed to obscure his federal tax exposure, deflect civil and criminal liability, and discredit his former personal manager and whistleblower, Kelley Lynch. Simmons, relying almost entirely on Cohen's legal team—including Robert Kory and Michelle Rice—repeats litigation-protected falsehoods without interviewing Lynch, who held legal and contractual interests in Cohen's business entities and received commissions acknowledged by Cohen under oath. The biography reframes legal retaliation—including a SWAT hoax, restraining orders, and the seizure of exculpatory documents—as emotional responses to betrayal, masking a coordinated campaign to suppress IRS inquiry and silence dissent. Through romanticized prose and mythological tropes, Simmons recasts tax fraud as poetic suffering, transforming financial misconduct into a story of artistic redemption. The book has caused lasting harm by distorting the public record, undermining federal oversight, and enabling Cohen’s estate to continue promoting falsehoods. Far from a neutral account, I'm Your Man is a curated defense narrative posing as biography—one that demands critical reassessment and public accountability.

“THE COVER STORY” “The definitive biography of one of the most enigmatic, beloved, and celebrated artists of our time.” Critique: The word “definitive” signals to the reader that this account is authoritative, exhaustive, and balanced. In fact, Simmons never contacted Kelley Lynch—the central figure in Cohen’s financial and legal narrative. Calling it “definitive” without presenting her perspective invalidates the term and exposes the work as curated propaganda.

“Leonard Cohen’s extensive and successful recent worldwide tour has demonstrated that his popularity across generations and borders has never been greater.” Critique: This line establishes a mythology of triumph over adversity. However, it omits the crucial fact that the tour was planned well before Cohen and Lynch parted ways. It was launched in coordination with this cover story to publicly suppress Cohen’s massive tax exposure and IRS liability crisis—stemming from millions in unreported loans (disguised as income) from Traditional Holdings, LLC, as well as the misappropriation of millions from other entities. This was not a spontaneous decision to reconnect with fans.

“Cohen’s life is one of singular mystique.” Critique: “Mystique” here is a literary euphemism for non-disclosure. It primes readers to accept vagueness in place of facts. Simmons leans on this mystique to gloss over the detailed financial structures and legal machinations that Cohen orchestrated and later misrepresented.

“This major in-depth biography is the book Cohen’s fans have been waiting for.” Critique: This acknowledges the book is fan service—not investigative journalism. It was never written to present a complete record. The “fans have been waiting for” line betrays the true purpose: mythmaking.

“Acclaimed writer/journalist Sylvie Simmons has interviewed more than 100 figures from Cohen’s life and work...” Critique: Simmons interviews over 100 people but somehow omits the one person with direct legal, financial, managerial, and intellectual property ties to Cohen’s entities—Kelley Lynch. This is malpractice in any journalistic or biographical standard. Artwork: KL writes and advises Sylvie Simmons to cease and desist.

“...including his main muses... artists... producers... closest friends... spiritual figures...” Critique: This catalog of talking heads reinforces a cult of personality. None of these sources were involved in Cohen’s financial or business infrastructure. Simmons elevates peripheral sources over central witnesses to maintain the romantic tone.

“Cohen, notoriously private, has granted interviews himself.” Critique: “Notoriously private” again preps the reader to forgive omissions. But Cohen’s privacy didn’t stop him from making calculated public declarations to the IRS and courts, including countless false and perjured statements in legal documents and declarations. Simmons accepts his curated narrative without critical challenge or evidence.

“I’m Your Man offers new perspectives on Cohen and his life.” Critique: False. It omits the most important legal and financial facts surrounding Cohen’s life and misuse of Traditional Holdings, LLC, other entities, the Greenberg lawsuit, and Lynch’s federal whistleblower role. Simmons repackages Cohen’s legal defense narrative as “perspective.”

“It will be one of the most talked-about books of the season, and for years to come.” Critique: And it was—because it functioned as a strategic PR clean-up for Cohen and Kory during a period of increasing federal scrutiny that led to the involvement of IRS Criminal Division.

Epilogue & Author’s Note “Leonard suggests we make the most of it and sit outside… four hats on the stand… Fred Astaire…” Critique: Classic misdirection. Simmons sets a theatrical, cozy scene to humanize Cohen and disarm the reader before introducing his misleading version of events. This trivializes the gravity of the federal tax fraud and litigation Cohen was entangled in.

“He was just making conversation, really... Would you like a scoop of ice cream in your coffee?” Critique: This calculated intimacy between author and subject is disturbing in a purportedly objective biography. It is used to emotionally align Simmons with Cohen while he fed her disinformation about his legal exposure.

“Without the tolerance, trust, candor, generosity and good humor of Leonard Cohen, this book would not be what it is.” Critique: Nor would it be what it isn’t: accurate. Simmons declares bias in the author-subject relationship upfront, acknowledging her gratitude while implicitly confirming that Cohen had significant editorial influence—even if informal. Artwork - LC puts a bullseye on KL and lies about her extensively and globally.

“The same can be said for his manager, Robert Kory. I am deeply grateful to them both.” Critique: Simmons expresses gratitude to the very man who helped craft Cohen’s post-2004 legal retaliation and tax fraud defense narrative. Alongside Cohen, Kory played a central role in the lawsuits against Lynch, the orchestration of the SWAT hoax narrative, and the fraudulent presentation of Cohen’s massive tax exposure to the IRS—while also helping shape the yellow journalism used to obscure it.

“They say you can judge a man’s character by the company he keeps...” Critique: And yet no mention of Lynch, the person entrusted with power of attorney, 99.5% ownership in TH, 15% ownership in other IP entities, and the person Cohen testified was responsible for organizing his business. She was erased precisely because she could testify to the truth.

This section of the book sets the tone for a hagiographic, one-sided portrayal of Leonard Cohen as a sage-saint wronged by a “Judas,” while providing cover for financial misconduct. The remaining content continues this pattern, adopting Cohen’s voice uncritically and building a false redemption arc. Here is the next installment of the line-by-line dissection of Sylvie Simmons’ I’m Your Man, picking up with the “A Manual for Living with Defeat” and “Love and Theft” sections:

“A Manual for Living with Defeat” “In 2008, as the tour was about to begin, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission brought its own case against Neal Greenberg…” Critique: Simmons implies that Greenberg’s regulatory issues retroactively justify Cohen’s accusations against Lynch. What she fails to explain is that Cohen continued working with Greenberg long after Lynch exited in 2004. Greenberg’s SEC problems began in 2005 and were wholly unrelated to Cohen’s internal TH accounting fraud, the $6.7M in loans Cohen took and failed to repay, or his unfiled tax returns for TH post-2003.

“Says Robert Kory, ‘The irony is that if Kelley had not taken the money… Leonard might well have lost all that money anyway, because it was invested with Neal Greenberg.’” Critique: This is the foundational lie of Cohen’s defense narrative. There is no evidence that Lynch “took the money.” Kory’s statement reframes Cohen’s own unreported withdrawals and mischaracterized loans as theft. This is a propaganda technique: accuse someone of what you yourself did, then credit their “betrayal” with your salvation.

“If this were a Bible and not a biography, Kelley would have the Judas role…” Critique: This is not subtle. Simmons openly positions Lynch as the betrayer—not with evidence, but through literary analogy. It’s mythmaking. And the analogy conveniently buries Cohen’s own role in draining the TH account and falsifying documents submitted to federal tax authorities.

“Lynch, after losing her house in Mandeville Canyon, continued to move around America, blogging, e-mailing and leaving offensive and threatening messages...” Critique: Lynch’s blogs and emails were whistleblower documentation, sent to the IRS, FBI, DOJ, and legal counsel. The “threatening messages” trope was deployed in Cohen’s domestic violence filings to silence and criminalize Lynch’s legal correspondence. Simmons doesn’t distinguish between First Amendment–protected speech and alleged harassment—because doing so would unravel the carefully constructed villain arc. Artwork - KL homeless in California.

“Greenberg... moved to Leonard’s hometown, Montreal, where he was last reported working as a Buddhist teacher.” Critique: This detail is inserted as poetic irony. But the real irony is that Greenberg was suing Cohen and Kory for extortion and conspiracy in 2005—raising serious concerns about fabricated declarations, witness tampering, and a mutual cover-up effort involving the TH books and records. And, as a so-called Buddhist, ripping his clients off.

“Love and Theft” “Women. You couldn’t move for them…” Critique: Simmons segues into an unnecessary, gendered digression designed to pivot the narrative back to Leonard as an aging charmer surrounded by loyal women. This distracts from the unresolved financial fraud and legal retaliation Cohen engaged in. Artwork - KL outside LC's humble abode.

“Kelley Lynch, Leonard’s manager, would often show up at around the same time and eat with them.” Critique: This absurdly casual reference to Lynch ignores the reality: she was Cohen’s personal manager, IP strategist, and the legal owner of nearly all the entities involved in his tax sheltering strategies. By trivializing her presence to “showing up and eating lunch,” Simmons demeans her professional standing.

“In October 2001, Ten New Songs… The album, Leonard said, ‘could be described as a duet.’” Critique: Simmons does what she often does: pivot away from the financial and tax reality (Ten New Songs was monetized via the TH annuity strategy, and the associated IP rights were part of Cohen’s later concealment) and uses music as misdirection.

“Phil Spector... Leonard told the detectives, ‘It was basically just a good rock ’n’ roll story.’” Critique: This account omits Lynch’s 2005 communication with Phil Spector’s legal team and other authorities regarding a gun incident involving Cohen. The gun stories weren’t just “rock ‘n’ roll”—they were being reframed to neutralize potential witness credibility and obstruct inquiries into Cohen’s long pattern of contradictory statements. Artwork - Cohen's "good rock 'n roll stories."

“It was clear that I was not to be considered a valuable witness. I was never approached again.” Critique: That’s because Cohen contradicted his own stories. The LAPD did not follow up on his Spector interview because Cohen’s accounts shifted depending on the venue. What Simmons fails to address is how Cohen used these fluctuating tales to control narratives—whether with detectives or journalists.

The next section moves into the mythologized October 2004 “discovery” of the alleged financial betrayal, the fraudulent “termination,” and the construction of the Lynch-as-criminal narrative. That’s where Cohen’s IRS cover story really solidifies. Artwork - Leonard Cohen w/ tall tales and biographer.

“In October 2004, the telephone rang in Leonard’s Montreal apartment...” Critique: Simmons opens with a fabricated inciting incident involving Lorca Cohen, her shop, and an unnamed third-party informant. This revisionist anecdote functions as a convenient literary device to obscure the true catalyst: Kelley Lynch’s CPA uncovered substantial tax fraud involving Traditional Holdings, LLC, prompting Lynch to retain tax litigation counsel in September 2004. The supposed “informant”—a self-proclaimed arms dealer and Julie Eisenberg’s boyfriend, driving her in a borrowed sports car to Lorca Cohen’s shop—was nothing more than theatrical misdirection in a larger cover story. Artwork - Joker informant, a self proclaimed arms dealer, with Cohen's daughter but no evidence - just a cover story for Leonard Cohen.

“It was as puzzling to Leonard as it had been to Lorca...” Critique: Cohen wasn’t puzzled. He was panicked. Emails and legal correspondence show that Cohen, Westin, and Greenberg were urgently trying to meet with Lynch without her lawyers to “fix” the legal mess after her CPA raised red flags with the IRS. Simmons fabricates innocence and bewilderment where legal strategy and concealment were actually unfolding.

“Leonard... had given Lynch broad power of attorney over his finances.” Critique: Misleading. The January 31, 2002 POA was requested by Cohen for a real estate closing while he was in India. It had nothing to do with Lynch accessing his bank accounts (which she had signature authority on due to her role as personal manager, not via the POA). Cohen signed his own checks. Artwork - Cohen was traveling to India while the homes he bought for his son and daughter were closing and the escrow companies required POAs.

“He trusted her enough to have named her in his living will...” Critique: Simmons weaponizes this point as a symbol of emotional betrayal while ignoring that this level of trust further undermines Cohen’s later claim that Lynch was a rogue actor. If she was his fiduciary, appointed to make end-of-life decisions, then she was obviously not just “an employee.” Kelley Lynch had asked that she be removed from this role and was replaced by Anjani Thomas months prior to Cohen's tax cover up began.

“Leonard went straightaway to his bank... Almost all of Leonard’s money was gone.” Critique: Complete fabrication. TH assets—where the money was housed—were managed by Neal Greenberg in Colorado, not Cohen’s CNB accounts. Cohen did not discover any “missing funds” at CNB. What he did do, in conjunction with Westin and Kory, was begin crafting a narrative that recharacterized his own withdrawals as “unauthorized.” This was after Lynch’s legal counsel attempted to schedule a meeting over the tax fraud and Cohen related entities.

“Leonard told her that he had removed her name as a signatory on his accounts, and he fired her.” Critique: Another complete fabrication. Lynch refused to meet with Cohen as of the morning of October 21, 2004. She was represented by counsel, and Cohen never formally terminated her. Instead, Kory later submitted a backdated “termination letter” as part of a fraudulent narrative.

“Leonard knew that Lynch—like Marty Machat... had taken care of it.” Critique: This line is strategically included to build credibility and emotional trust. It reinforces Lynch’s managerial legitimacy—only to set up a dramatic betrayal arc that allows Simmons to seamlessly shift into a defamation campaign. Leonard Cohen also had a "good rock 'n roll" story re. Machat & Machat's ownership interest in Stranger Music, Inc.

“In 1998 Leonard had told Billboard... ‘I found Kelley and set my house in order...’” Critique: Precisely. Cohen praised Lynch publicly and privately for structuring his life, negotiating IP sales, coordinating with tax and legal professionals, and managing his career. This public praise undercuts every claim of mismanagement made later.

“To have had almost all the money he had made stolen out from under him was difficult to take in, but also remarkably easy.” Critique: Simmons shifts into emotional manipulation here. No evidence of theft exists and Cohen testified under oath that Kelley never stole from him - just his "peace of mind." No forensic accounting has ever proved that Lynch “took” anything. Cohen, on the other hand, misappropriated millions from entities that were not his personal property, failed to report the $8 million Sony IP sale on the corporate returns prepared by his personal tax lawyer, and had other huge problems with IRS including off-shore holding accounts (to evade paying taxes on global income) well before KL knew him.

“That it appeared to have dated back to the time when Leonard left the material world to live in a monastery added more than a touch of irony.” Critique: No, it dated back to when Cohen, Greenberg, and Westin created TH and Cohen began treating the corporate assets as personal income while bypassing IRS reporting requirements. The “monk” narrative is a smokescreen designed to obscure Cohen’s role in tax fraud.

“Musicians and monks tend to have few skills in matters of finance.” Critique: Cohen was not financially naive. He reviewed budgets, instructed attorneys and investment managers, micromanaged his affairs and deals, and amended his own tax returns to falsely resolve a Tax Court case in 2003 with IRS. The claim that he was simply a confused monk is contradicted by decades of documentation showing meticulous attention to detail in all his business dealings.

“If not quite a koan, it was a hell of a conundrum...” Critique: Simmons romanticizes fraud. This is a critical junction where the reader should be informed of Cohen’s failure to file TH tax returns post-2003, the $6.7M in loans he never repaid, and the IRS liabilities he sought to offload onto Lynch. Instead, we get metaphor. Koan - If a man steals millions through shell companies and no journalist asks why, does the IRS make a sound?

This portion of I’m Your Man is literary alchemy: it turns legal culpability into personal tragedy, factual inquiry into spiritual metaphor, and whistleblower retaliation into poetic justice. It is not biography. It is cover-up in prose. “Back in Los Angeles, the letters and lawsuits... became ever more convoluted and bizarre.” Critique: Simmons primes the reader for absurdity—framing the legal disputes as “bizarre” to deflect scrutiny from the actual fraud. What she omits is that Leonard Cohen’s own legal filings were riddled with contradictions, fraud, perjury, and concealment of IRS-relevant material facts.

The SWAT Raid: Manufactured Spectacle “A particularly sorry and surreal episode occurred at Lynch’s home in Mandeville Canyon.” Critique: Simmons begins a grotesquely dramatized account that fails to mention that this was a false police report. LAPD falsely allegd there was hostage which they later identified as her "dog." The scene is described for optics and effect—not accuracy. Artwork - Leonard Cohen's good rock 'n roll gun stories.

“Twenty-five armed men jumped out—a SWAT team...” Critique: This is lifted nearly verbatim from Cohen’s civil declarations and Ann Diamond's article "Whatever Happened to Kelley Lynch?, which were used in restraining order applications—not in criminal court. Simmons repeats it uncritically. The call was a hoax. This incident was then recycled by Cohen’s team for use in defamatory media coverage and declarations to IRS Criminal Division.

“It was Lou, Lynch’s gray African parrot: ‘I see dead people!’” Critique: Simmons inserts this detail to frame Lynch as mentally unwell. It’s classic character assassination. A talking parrot becomes a narrative weapon. This has nothing to do with finance or litigation and everything to do with discrediting a federal whistleblower through ridicule. Artwork - Lou confronts LAPD SWAT.

“Lynch ran to the swimming pool and jumped in.” Critique: This dramatic flourish is pure sensationalism. Simmons doesn’t note that Lynch was removed, not arrested; nor does she explain that Lynch filed formal complaints over the false SWAT report, which remains unresolved or that the report that followed used someone else's identity, social security number, medical records, religion, and so forth.

“She was involuntarily drugged and held in the hospital for twenty-four hours...” Critique: Simmons includes this with zero investigative rigor. She presents it as a form of dark comedy rather than what it was—state-enabled suppression of a witness amid an unfolding IRS-related legal scandal.

The Default Judgment: Pretext for Federal Misinformation “In May 2006 a superior court judge granted a default judgment... $7.3 million.” Critique: Simmons never explains that Lynch was unrepresented, homeless, not served Cohen's complaint, and denied discovery access. The so-called “default judgment” included fraudulent forensic report that didn't represent an accounting of corporations, or ownership interests. Just a litigation protected fiction presented to IRS Criminal Division (together with fraudulent and perjured legal documents) - co-mingling personal and business income and expenses. In other words, Cohen presented himself to IRS as the "alter ego" of literal corporate "fictions."

“Lynch... to all appearances she was penniless.” Critique: And yet Simmons continues to portray her as the architect of a multi-million-dollar fraud. If Cohen was defrauded of $13 million as Kory claims, why did no criminal case ever succeed? The answer: because the fraud narrative was a cover for Cohen’s personal withdrawals and unreported income. Cohen bankrupted Kelley intentionally to prevent her from defending herself, hiring attorneys, or going to IRS.

“Lynch... also began to make threatening phone calls...” Critique: Cohen and Kory repeatedly labeled protected speech as “threatening” to obtain restraining orders. Simmons repeats their language without examining what was actually said or whether these communications were legally privileged, sent to counsel, journalists, or government agencies. At no time did she make threatening phone calls. However, Cohen worked on the purported voicemail messages with professional sound engineers (altering the original recordings). This is part of Cohen's cover story. Artwork - Leonard Cohen literally working with sound engineers to alter voicemail messages.

“State by state, Rice led an effort to obtain restraining orders...” Critique: This campaign wasn’t about safety—it was about silencing. Rice and Kory filed in multiple jurisdictions knowing Lynch was legally indigent and without counsel. They used default judgments and records to fabricate a criminal persona for someone reporting financial misconduct to the IRS and DOJ. As the Greenberg complaint against Cohen and Kory, for extortion and conspiracy, set forth: Cohen and Kory planned to use fake protection orders to silence, crush, and destroy Kelley Lynch. Artwork: Rice works hard to create her fantasy figure to become partner at Robert Kory's Law firm and writes someone they are encouraging to stalk Lynch and everyone in her iife (a lawyer working with their firm in fact) that it makes her "richer than fuck!"

The final portion of Sylvie Simmons’ I’m Your Man, frames Leonard Cohen’s financial collapse (or massive misappropriation from corporations that were not his personal property) as poetic redemption and continues using character assassination, misrepresentation, and selective omission to shield Cohen from liability and enshrine his tax fraud defense in literary canon. “Leonard also finally completed Book of Longing… Leonard had spent so long working on it.” Critique: Simmons again distracts readers with Cohen’s creative output rather than interrogating the legal and financial war happening behind the scenes. She fails to mention that Cohen’s ability to publish and tour was directly facilitated by his suppression of Kelley Lynch, whose legal rights to income, commissions, and IP shares had not been extinguished—just ignored.

“One thing that was missing was some artwork… in one of the thirty boxes of sketchbooks... Lynch wasn’t saying.” Critique: This insinuates that Lynch was hiding or withholding Cohen’s personal effects. In reality, Lynch repeatedly requested that Cohen return her files—including personal, legal, and corporate documents. The only person who refused access to Lynch's business and personal files was Cohen, who removed everything during a forced seizure without discovery or trial. The idea that the artwork for Book of Longing was being “held hostage” is narrative theater designed to justify the writ-of-possession stunt. At no time did Lynch have the artwork related to "Book of Longing." This is Leonard Cohen fan fiction.

Conclusion: Reframing Tax Fraud as Resurrection The final movement of I’m Your Man positions Leonard Cohen’s resurgence as a triumph of art over adversity. But the real story is this: • Cohen misused a series of corporate entities—TH, BMT, OI—to shelter tens of millions in IP income that he misappropriated. • He took at least $6.7 million in loans from TH alone and failed to repay them with interest as required. • He failed to file federal tax returns for TH and one other entity from 2003 through his death. • He testified under oath that Lynch was owed commissions while simultaneously calling those payments embezzlement. • He defaulted her in court using sealed documents and declarations drafted by legal counsel met with IRS Criminal Division and submitted provably false statements, fraudulent legal documents, perjured declarations, and fake co-mingled forensic report. And this is only the tip of the iceberg. Sylvie Simmons’ book doesn’t merely gloss over these facts—it becomes part of the cover-up. A public relations engine in prose form, delivered with literary grace but devoid of investigatory substance. It's ultimate target was Kelley Lynch.

Disclaimer: The article and accompanying illustrations present Kelley Lynch as a "haute couture Buddhist" hipster character in an imaginative and stylized portrayal. This depiction reflects an artistic and surreal interpretation inspired by the complex legal disputes and public narratives that followed her split from Leonard Cohen. The choice to portray Lynch adorned in jewels and sophisticated attire references Cohen's statements after their parting, where he attributed her alleged “downfall” to extravagant spending on items like jewelry, shoes, and haute couture—a narrative Lynch firmly disputes. The artistic representation, while not intended as a literal portrayal, emphasizes the intensity and multifaceted nature of her legal claims, offering a metaphorical view into the high-stakes drama of her experience. This stylized depiction serves to underscore the layers of conflict, public perception, and personal resilience inherent in her story.

Copyright © 2024 Kelley Lynch. Unauthorized reproduction of this article or artwork is strictly prohibited. Photograph: Jill, His Holiness Kusum Lingpa, and Kelley.

This blog post contains quoted material from I'm Your Man: The Life of Leonard Cohen by Sylvie Simmons. These excerpts are used for the purposes of criticism, commentary, and public interest reporting, including the direct confrontation of Simmons' outrageous defamation involving Kelley Lynch. The quoted content is essential to exposing and correcting false and misleading claims that have contributed to intentional reputational harm, obscured material facts, and distorted public understanding of legal, financial, and whistleblower matters involving Kelley Lynch.