Blank Pleading Template With Line Numbering -- Word Web viewThe transcript of Steven Machat and my...
Transcript of Blank Pleading Template With Line Numbering -- Word Web viewThe transcript of Steven Machat and my...
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DECLARATION OF KELLEY LYNCHEXHIBIT HHHH
SCHEDULES OF PERJURED STATEMENTSIN THE DECLARATIONS OF
MICHELLE RICE, LEONARD COHEN,ROBERT KORY & KEVIN PRINSMISREPRESENTATIONS IN THE
DECLARATION OF SCOTT EDELMAN
Kelley Lynch declares:
1. I am a resident of Los Angeles, California, over the age of 18, and have
personal knowledge
of the facts set forth hereinbelow and can competently testify thereto if called
as a witness.
The following Declarations were attached to Leonard Cohen’s Opposition
documents filed in this case in January 2014. They are replete with perjured
statements. This document summarizes some of the perjured statements
contained in these documents. Robert Kory’s declaration referred to the
Declaration of Kevin Prins supporting the default in May 2006 and fraudulent
“expense ledger” that he supervised. See declarations of Michelle Rice,
Leonard Cohen, Robert Kory, Kevin Prins, and Scott Edelman attached to
Plaintiff’s Opposition filed January 6, 2014 in this matter.
Declaration of Michelle Rice which purportedly “demonstrates that Lynch had read of the copy of the Default Judgment no later than May 2008.” See Michelle Rice declaration, submitted with Plaintiffs’ Opposition dated, January 4, 2014.
Exhibits attached to Michelle Rice’s declaration:
Exhibit A: Submission of Proof of Service (Natural Wealth Civil Case Number I :05-cv- 01233-
- 1 -Exhibit HHHH: Schedule of Perjured Statements in Declarations
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
LTB-MJW).
Exhibit B: Copies of the electronic receipts received from the District of Colorado’s CM/ECF System of the electronic filing of the Motion and the supporting exhibits and declarations. This April 28, 2008 Exhibit shows Lynch’s former Brentwood, California home which she was evicted from on December 28, 2005.
Exhibit C: Copy of Motion Exhibit A- I 6, the exemplified copy of the May 15, 2006 Judgment.
Exhibit D: Lynch/Rice April 30, 2008 and May 1, 2008 emails re. Lynch’s mailing address (Brentwood).[Email notes that Kory & Rice wrote Phil Shull’s attorney, Craig Blockwick, and understood that the Brentwood address was not the last known address; there was and remains no agreement to accept service of legal documents via email filed with this or the Colorado Court.]
Exhibit E: Rice email asking for Lynch’s current mailing address.
Exhibit F: Lynch’s email re. her address and Phil Spector’s California P.O. Box [email address notes that this is Phil Spector’s California address.] Excerpt of enclosed email content from Lynch to Rice: “Let me remind you of something - there is evidence that your client (and , “Robert Kory”) attempted to silence me, terrorize me, crush me, and destroy me, Some of that evidence is with the FBI in Denver - perhaps they are amused by these antics and perhaps they want to develop a close friendship with ‘Robert Kory.’ That is the FBI in Denver’s business. Not mine. There is evidence with Gcreenberg/Posel/Scheid/Chipman/et al. that Leonard Norman Cohen and Robert Kory have engagedin witness and evidence tampering. According to the Duty Agent I spoke with at the FBI in Denverthat is criminal activity. Perhaps you should drop the ludicrous insanity having to do with “slander,and focus on the issues that are actually criminal. Then, perhaps you can figure out what tax returnwas filed by Traditional Holdings, LLC for the year 2001 – I know that ‘Robert Kory and ‘DiMascio & Berardo’ did not want to provoke any type of unwarranted attention on the part of the IRS.”
Exhibit G: Lynch’s May 1, 2008 email advising Rice that “No judgment was obtained, the fraudulent, bogus, insane lawsuit was never served on me, and I will address this in my own lawsuit.” Also excerpt of email to IRS advising that I “was never served, and, I might point [sic] out – again, that I was told in no uncertain terms (by numerous individuals) that if Cohen attempted to say he
- 2 -Exhibit HHHH: Schedule of Perjured Statements in Declarations
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
was the rightful owner of TH it proved further fraud.” This email also confirms that “Cohen and Kory attempted to (and in some instance did) recruit third parties in their conspiracy and procure false testimony.”
Exhibit H: Judge Lewis Babcock’s September 5, 2008 Order (Natural Wealth case) which held that: In rendering judgment, the California court declared Lynch was not the owner of any assets in Traditional Holdings, LLC” and any interest Lynch had in any other entity related to Cohen … she [held] as trustee for Cohen’s equitable title … The California court enjoyed Lynch from interfering with Cohen’s right to receive any such funds or property or in any other way exercising control over any funds or property related to Cohen. The California court ruling was not appealed and is now final.” This email also addresses the allegations of Leonard Cohen’s criminal and civil tax fraud Lynch brought to the attention of IRS.
Exhibit I: Confirmation that Michelle Rice received a copy of the notice of the District Court’s September 5, 2008 order and Lynch’s email address was included on the service list.
Exhibit J: Copy of the Permanent Restraining order issued by the Boulder County Court on September 2, 2008 (prior to the entry of Judge Babcock’s Order).
Exhibit K: May 25, 2011, registration of foreign Colorado Permanent Restraining Order with Los Angeles Superior Court. Case No. BQ 033717. Lara Bloomquist, LA City Attorney’s Supervising Attorney Family Violence Unit, mailed these letters (and attendant “domestic violence related” orders to Rice/Kory on April 20, 2012. The original Boulder ,Colorado Order was not a domestic violence order. Boulder Combined Court confirmed this for Lynch in their April 10, 2014 email. See Kelley Lynch declaration, Exhibit B.
Exhibit L: Los Angeles Superior Court’s April 17, 2012 “Domestic Violence Related” Protective Orders granted Kory and Rice, without the benefit of a hearing.
My comments on the “Declaration of Michelle Rice” dated January 4,
2014 are addressed below. Michelle Rice has not submitted evidence that
Lynch was served Leonard Cohen’s Summons & Complaint; she has not
submitted evidence she and Lynch (or any Cohen representative and Lynch)
agreed to service of legal documents via email); Lynch’s blogs and email
accounts were targeted and shut down by Bay Area lawyer Stephen Gianelli,
- 3 -Exhibit HHHH: Schedule of Perjured Statements in Declarations
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Phil Spector former assistant, Michelle Blaine, Leonard Cohen fan, Susanne
Walsh, and others. Rice’s declaration does prove perjury due to the fact that
she testified that, when the Boulder Order was entered that there were no
outstanding litigation matters involving Cohen and Lynch. Judge Babcock did
not enter his Order until September 5, 2008 and the Boulder, Colorado hearing
(re. Cohen’s attempt to further silence Lynch) was entered on September 2,
2008. The Boulder, Colorado Order was not a domestic violence order. The
original Permanent Restraining Order (that expired in 2008) Cohen obtain
against Lynch in 2005 was not a domestic violence order but rather a civil
harassment order. Leonard Cohen and his legal representatives have used
highly abusive litigation tactics against Lynch that would include the willful and
knowing failure to serve Lynch Plaintiffs’ Summons & Complaint.
DECLARATION OF MICHELLE RICE
1. From approximately January 2005 until the present, Michelle Rice has
dedicated her life to targeting me and lying about matters that involve Leonard
Cohen and numerous entities. Rice’s tactics have evidently been so successful
that she was rewarded with a partnership status by The Law Offices of Robert
B. Kory.
2. Leonard Cohen abandoned Property Lynch agreed to store for him (in
1996) as a courtesy. Lynch was under no legal obligation to return anything to
Cohen. Furthermore, the documents were worth less than $300 as the value
would have been limited to the pen and ink. The manuscript that Cohen alleges
Lynch had in her possession was a photocopy of an old document. The awards,
- 4 -Exhibit HHHH: Schedule of Perjured Statements in Declarations
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
which Cohen gave Lynch as he was not interested in plastic PROCAN awards
were Lynch’s property although she was uninterested in them as well. In
DiMascio & Berardo’s October 27, 2004 letter to Richard Westin, Cohen’s
personal tax and corporate attorney, he was advised to instruct Leonard Cohen
to make arrangements to pick up all of his personal property. Leonard Cohen
was well aware that I had an office on Keniston Avenue in Los Angeles; an
office in my Brentwood, California home; and, since he renovated his garage on
Tremaine Avenue, had stored boxes of old business documents as a courtesy to
him. Leonard Cohen made no attempt whatsoever to make arrangements to
pick up items at my home. He abandoned them and I had no obligation
whatsoever to make any arrangement to “return” them to him or anyone else.
Leonard Cohen and Richard Westin received this letter because the two of
them attended a meeting with my lawyers. Leonard Cohen also made
arrangements to pick up his property from my office. I was not present, he
and/or his daughter were permitted to take what they desired, and Cohen even
took items belonging to me and/or corporate entities.
3. I was served a fraudulent temporary restraining order in the presence of
Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department. This is not at issue but clearly that
was coordinated with other events. I was not present for the hearing when this
order was made permanent and do not have the declarations or information
detailing what was alleged and/or why this civil restraining order was granted.
Leonard Cohen and his current lawyer, Jeffrey Korn, refuse to provide me with
copies of all documents filed in this and the related case.
- 5 -Exhibit HHHH: Schedule of Perjured Statements in Declarations
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
4. The lawsuit in the present matter was alleged to have been served in
August 2005. It is completely irrelevant what color my hair was months later.
In August 2005, I was a white female, approximately 5’6” in height, weighing
approximately 102 pounds, and had short dark brown hair. Plaintiffs ongoing
lies will never change that fact. Michelle Rice is evidently making factual
statements about me during a period of time when she had never seen me.
5. The Natural Wealth Complaint against Leonard Cohen and Robert Kory
raises very serious allegations related to witness tampering, blackmail and/or
bribery, abusive litigation and other tactics, Cohen’s plan to use fraudulent
restraining orders to discredit me, legal conspiracy, and extortion. Michelle
Rice, co-counsel in this matter and paid witness in others, represented Cohen
and Kory in the Natural Wealth case. See Natural Wealth Complaint attached
as Exhibit “A” to Tactical Allocation’s Ex Parte Application in Intervention for
Order Protecting & Preserving Evidence in Related Case No. BC341220.
6. Leonard Cohen’s legal position with respect to this case proves that he
views himself as the alter ego of Traditional Holdings, LLC and willfully elected
to disregard corporate ownership interests, corporate books and records, and
the loans/advances he evidently felt entitled to take but not repay. He was well
aware that his loans/advances had to be repaid within 3 years at 6% interest.
That is clearly set forth in the Annuity Agreement. Furthermore, although Neal
Greenberg would have the definitive schedule of loans and/or advances,
Leonard Cohen and his representatives were obligated to document these loans
and/or advances with promissory notes and failed to do so. In the alternative,
- 6 -Exhibit HHHH: Schedule of Perjured Statements in Declarations
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Richard Westin (in keeping with his m.o. of making intentional mistakes)
prepared a handful of random notes in the name of LC Investments, LLC. I was
personally told by both Robert Kory and my lawyers that the plan was to roll
Traditional Holdings, LLC into LC Investments, LLC.
7. The process server in the Natural Wealth case did not serve me and I did
not refuse service. The Complaint was left outside my front door. I did not
argue, at that time, that I was not served. I gave this copy to my neighbor who
is an investor. He advised me that his firm moved all their investments from
Greenberg. I had previously asked my friend, Clea Surkhang, to go to the
Colorado Court and obtain a copy of the Complaint and send it to me which she
did. The situation with respect to this Complaint has nothing whatsoever to do
with the instant matter. What is glaringly obvious is that process servers rely
on the description provided and, in this case, simply left the Complaint outside
the front door and falsified the proof of service. Nevertheless, I received
Greenberg’s Complaint and no service issues have arisen .
7. It is relevant to note that on August 24, 2005, I did not resemble an
individual who would have been described as someone who had blonde hair.
There seems to be a problem with providing process servers with descriptions
as it allows them to simply state that they served a person resembling the
individual described. While the process server believed I had blond hair on
August 24, 2005, I had extremely short and very dark (nearly black) hair. I also
did not have a female co-occupant who resembled the individual described in
the Proof of Service filed with this Court.
- 7 -Exhibit HHHH: Schedule of Perjured Statements in Declarations
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
13. Numerous claims did not survive in the Colorado case due to the fact that
the Court did not have jurisdiction. I chose not to enter an appearance in this
case; made my reasons for doing so known to Judge Lewis Babcock; had
concerns that the lawsuit (and this related case) were nothing other than an
attempt to cover up tax fraud and obstruct justice; and believe Leonard Cohen’s
legal position absolutely proves that he views himself as the alter ego of Blue
Mist Touring Company, Inc., Traditional Holdings, LLC and other entities.
Steven Machat, who (together with his father) worked as Leonard Cohen’s
manager and attorney, has been quite clear that Leonard Cohen stole from him
and uses false allegations that he was ripped off to breach contracts. There is
no disputing the fact that I made an intentional decision not to appear in that
case and argue issues related to the “interpleader claim.” I have no idea why
Rice is raising issues, in response to my Motion to Vacate, that relate to a
federal lawsuit in Colorado.
14. A copy of the judgment entered in the Los Angeles Superior Court on May
15, 2006 does not prove that I was served the Summons & Complaint in Case
No. BC338322. Nor does it prove that there was any agreement between
Cohen’s representatives and myself proving that I agreed to email service. I
most certainly would not due to the unconscionable tactics Leonard Cohen and
his representatives, and others, have used against me.
16. At no time did any of Cohen’s representatives, including Michelle Rice,
attempt to actually serve me the Summons & Complaint. At no time did we
agree to email service. At no time was the proof of service amended to show
- 8 -Exhibit HHHH: Schedule of Perjured Statements in Declarations
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
service at a date other than the August 24, 2005 date. And, furthermore, my
email accounts and blogs were targeted by a variety of individuals including,
but not limited to, Stephen Gianelli, Michelle Blaine (Phil Spector’s former
assistant), Susanne Walsh (Leonard Cohen’s fan), and others.
17. I did not receive Cohen’s Motion and supporting documents (which
included a copy of the exemplified May 15, 2006 Judgment) in Colorado (where
Michelle Rice understood I resided at that time). I did not reside in California
and I most certainly did not reside at Phil Spector’s P.O. Box which he had
evidently shut down by the time these documents may have been mailed.
18. I have been very clear with this Court, Leonard Cohen, and his
representatives: I was not served the Summons and Complaint in this matter.
The proof of service is evidence of extrinsic fraud. Cohen and his
representatives continue to lie about that issue. My quoting from a Summary
Judgment in a Colorado case has nothing whatsoever to do with this case and it
does not prove that I was served the summons and complaint. In fact, my
language to the IRS is clear: I was never served and Leonard Cohen’s
allegations that he is the sole rightful owner of Traditional Holdings, LLC is
evidence of fraud. The judgment is void. And the lawsuit is utterly fraudulent,
bogus, and replete with false accusations, fraudulent misrepresentations, and
perjured statements.
19. The Court wrongfully conveyed my property to Leonard Cohen. The
default judgment is evidence of theft and essentially alters federal and state tax
returns I have filed. My shares of these entities were not held as “trustee for
- 9 -Exhibit HHHH: Schedule of Perjured Statements in Declarations
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Cohen’s equitable title.” No trust agreement exists. The judgment of the
California Court is void due to the fact that I was not served the summons and
complaint and the proof of service is evidence of extrinsic fraud.
20. I have no idea what any of this has to do with my Motion to Vacate. I
provided Michelle Rice with two addresses: one where I resided in Colorado
and a California address c/o Phil Spector. I did not enter an appearance in this
matter. I advised Judge Babcock that I believed this case was nothing other
than an attempt to cover up criminal tax fraud and obstruct justice. I did not
provide the court with an email address. Michelle Rice does not know me. I
would also like to point out that there were serious problems with the Court’s
email notifications and the PACER program. Kory and Rice, at the time she
emailed me, had my business address in Boulder, Colorado and were therefore
well aware that I no longer resided in Brentwood, California. Leonard Cohen
testified that he understood my whereabouts at all times based on the
information contained within my emails.
21. I have already acknowledged that I was aware of the lawsuit. Richard
Cromelin of the LA Times advised me that a suit had been filed. He had no
further details and confirmed that he personally did not have a copy of the
Complaint. Scott Edelman was also referred to as Cohen’s attorney in an
article printed at the time the Complaint was filed. I have enclosed Richard
Cromelin’s August 17, 2005 article together with the Billboard and BBC articles
mentioning Scott Edelman on August 16 and 18, 2005, respectively. I am
capable of googling information and then determining the phone number and
- 10 -Exhibit HHHH: Schedule of Perjured Statements in Declarations
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
email for various parties. Knowledge of a lawsuit is not sufficient to prove
service. Furthermore, I was unaware of the actual allegations. Cromelin’s
August 17, 2005 piece on Cohen’s lawsuit confirmed that he contacted me by
email and obtained a quote about the lawsuit:
Leonard Cohen sues ex-manager
August 17, 2005|Richard Cromelin
Singer-songwriter Leonard Cohen's four-year sojourn at a Zen monastery near Los Angeles in the late 1990s resulted in more than spiritual renewal for the celebrated musician. It also provided his business manager with the opportunity to raid his bank accounts to the tune of $5 million, according to a lawsuit Cohen filed Monday in Los Angeles Superior Court."After nearly 30 years in the music industry, Cohen could afford to take a few years off to lead a quiet spiritual life away from the mainstream," states the lawsuit naming his former business manager, Kelley Lynch, and tax attorney Richard Westin as defendants. "Given his modest lifestyle, Cohen reasonably expected royalties from his song copyrights and his records should have been sufficient to support him during his retirement years."Cohen also accuses Lynch and Westin of orchestrating an unnecessary sale of his music publishing company and artist royalties and of mismanaging his accounts. The suit seeks damages for breaches of fiduciary duty, breach of contract, common law fraud and other charges. Reached by e-mail Tuesday, Lynch responded, "It is my firm opinion that these claims are unsubstantiated."Cohen, 70, is one of the most acclaimed songwriters of the modern pop era. His best-known songs include "Suzanne," "Bird on the Wire" and "Sisters of Mercy."http://articles.latimes.com/2005/aug/17/entertainment/et-quick17.1
Leonard Cohen Sues Business ManagerAugust 16, 2005 12:00 AM EDT
Leonard Cohen sued his longtime business manager yesterday (Aug. 15) for allegedly defrauding the famed singer/songwriter of at least $5 million.
The complaint filed in Los Angeles Superior Court seeks damages for alleged breach of contract, breach of fiduciary duty, common law fraud, professional negligence and other claims against Kelley Lynch. Tax lawyer Richard Westin was also named as a defendant for allegedly mismanaging Cohen's retirement funds.
- 11 -Exhibit HHHH: Schedule of Perjured Statements in Declarations
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
The defendants were not immediately available for comment.
"This civil action is another case of a tragedy that has become all too familiar in the music industry -- a business manager and professional advisers exploit an immensely talented artist's loyalty and trust through greed, self-dealing, concealment, knowing misrepresentation and reckless disregard for professional fiduciary duties," according to the complaint filed by plaintiff's attorney Scott Edelman.
According to the suit, Lynch was Cohen's business manager for about 17 years until he fired her in October for allegedly taking money out of his personal and investment accounts. It was alleged that the amounts taken were far in excess of the 15% management compensation that Lynch was entitled to receive.
The fraud allegedly started while Cohen was taking time away from his career to focus on his spiritual life at the Mount Baldy Zen Center in Los Angeles. While Cohen was not recording or touring, Lynch allegedly started to pay herself a greater portion of the artist's royalties. She also allegedly introduced Cohen to Westin, who is accused of helping Lynch to orchestrate the sale of Cohen's music publishing and artist royalties.
"Cohen believed that he had hired Westin and [his firm] to protect his retirement savings, but, in fact, they burdened the sale with transactions costs in excess of $4 million and they devised unnecessarily complex corporate structures that allowed Lynch to steal over $5 million for her own benefit without Cohen's knowledge or consent," the suit states.
http://www.billboard.com/articles/news/61761/leonard-cohen-sues-business-manager
Singer Cohen sues former manager
LSinger Leonard Cohen has accused his former business manager of taking $5m (£2.7m) from his savings accounts while he spent time in a Buddhist monastery.
Last Updated: Thursday, 18 August 2005, 09:51 GMT 10:51 UK
Mr Cohen, 70, alleges that Kelley Lynch took millions from his accounts while he was at the Mount Baldy Zen Centre, in California, between 1994 and 1999.
Ms Lynch, who was sacked in late 2004, had been his manager for 17 years.
- 12 -Exhibit HHHH: Schedule of Perjured Statements in Declarations
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
The legal action also names tax lawyer Richard Westin, whom Ms Lynch allegedly hired to help her defraud Mr Cohen.
"This civil action is another case of a tragedy that has become all too familiar in the music industry," said Mr Cohen's attorney, Scott Edelman.
'Silent one'
The complaint filed on Monday accuses Ms Lynch of "greed, self-dealing, concealment, knowing misrepresentation and reckless disregard for professional fiduciary duties".
Mr Cohen claims Ms Lynch siphoned off amounts far in excess of the 15% to which she was entitled.Ms Lynch and Mr Westin could not be reached for comment on Wednesday.
Mr Cohen was ordained as a Zen monk during his time at the monastery and given the name of Jikan, or "silent one".
He returned to recording at the end of the 1990s, releasing a new album, Dear Heather, to mark his 70th birthday last year.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/entertainment/4162134.stm
22. I have no details regarding the restraining order issued in November
2005. Cohen and his representatives refuse to provide me with any documents.
I was served a copy of this order by Sergeant Fernandez of LASD, asked him if
everyone in California was assisting Cohen with his tax fraud, and advised him
to throw it in the trash. I have never seen the declarations and/or evidence
supporting this order. During my 2012 trial, Leonard Cohen testified that he
made his extraordinary flight into Boulder, Colorado (while in the midst of a
European tour) due to the fact that he was concerned I might attend his
concert in Denver. That concert was not scheduled for nearly one year
- 13 -Exhibit HHHH: Schedule of Perjured Statements in Declarations
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
following his flight to Colorado. The 2005 Permanent Restraining Order (which
expired in November 2008), Case No. BS 099650, is a civil protection order and
not a “domestic violence order.” These restraining orders have been used as
litigation tactics. I have asked Jeffrey Korn to provide me with copies of
documents filed in this case – including Leonard Cohen’s declaration. He
refuses to provide the documents to me.
LA SUPERIOR COURT CASE SUMMARYCase Number: BS099650
LEONARD N COHEN VS KELLEY A LYNCHFiling Date: 10/14/2005Case Type: Civil Harassment (General Jurisdiction)Status: Judgment by Court-Petition Granted 11/03/2005
Future Hearings
None
PartiesCOHEN LEONARD N - PetitionerEDELMAN SCOTT A - Attorney for PetitionerLYNCH KELLEY A - Respondent & Respondent in Pro Per
Documents Filed (Filing dates listed in descending order)11/03/2005 Stipulation to Court CommissionerFiled by Clerk11/03/2005 Order After Hearing-Civil TROFiled by Attorney for Pltf/Petnr11/03/2005 Proof of ServiceFiled by Attorney for Pltf/Petnr10/14/2005 Order to Show CauseFiled by Petitioner & Petitioner in Pro Per10/14/2005 Complaint
Proceedings Held (Proceeding dates listed in descending order)11/03/2005 at 08:30 am in Department 6, Harvey A. Silberman, PresidingHrng on Petn Prohibit Harassment (Tro In Effect) - TRO is granted
- 14 -Exhibit HHHH: Schedule of Perjured Statements in Declarations
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
http://www.lacourt.org/casesummary/ui/casesummary.aspx?
23. I have no idea what any of this has to do with my Motion to Vacate the
default judgment in this matter. On September 2, 2008, I attended the
Boulder, Colorado hearing, advised the judge that I felt these people were
insane, and requested that she make the order permanent. I would like to note
that I had no idea that this order never expired. There is confusion, caused
directly by the courts themselves, with the use of the word “permanent” to
describe orders that, in many jurisdictions, expire. After the hearing, I went
back to the court, read through the file, reviewed Cohen’s declaration for the
first time, discovered that it was replete with perjured statements, and filed a
Motion to Quash. Unfortunately, the court did not see fit to vacate the Motion
indicating, from my perspective, that fraud and perjury are perfectly
acceptable. I have been repeatedly advised by Boulder Combined Court that
this Order expired on February 15, 2009.
23. What is alarming, from my perspective, is the fact that Leonard Cohen
and his representatives continue to be rewarded for their abusive litigation
tactics. However, perjury and fraud does seem to work. What is disturbing in
this matter is the fact that these individuals are not in prison. That is my
personal opinion. On February 14, 2011, Michelle Rice wrote and lied to me. In
this email thread, Rice advised me that I had to use the “discovery” process in
this case (BC 338322) to obtain IRS required tax and corporate information.
The transcript of Steven Machat and my conversation was attached therefore.
See Kelley Lynch declaration, Exhibit J. Rice copied in IRS, FBI, Treasury,
- 15 -Exhibit HHHH: Schedule of Perjured Statements in Declarations
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Dennis Riordan, and Ron Burkle. At that time, Rice Sadvised me that the
Boulder, Colorado order was registered in Los Angeles, California. In January
2010, I contacted a former employer of mine (from when I was 22 or so) to say
hello, ask for a reference, and ask for some advice on how to vacate the
fraudulent Boulder, Colorado order obtained through the use of fraud and
perjury as I addressed in a Motion to Quash filed with the Boulder Court in or
around December 2009. I have enclosed the email I received from my former
employer who has specialized in federal injunctions for over 50 years. I have
redacted this individual’s contact information and name due to the fact that Bay
Area lawyer, Stephen Gianelli, and others continue to criminally harass my
witnesses. Those would include Rutger Penick, Paulette Brandt, Dan Meade,
and Clea Surkhang who have provided declarations in connection with this
Motion for Terminating Sanctions. I was attempting to address the “wrongful
restraining” and, at this time, phoned the Boulder Combined Court and was
advised that the Order expired on February 15, 2009. I did not actually reside
in Boulder, Colorado when the order was entered, was staying at a Hotel, and
moved to Northern New Jersey shortly after the Motion to Quash was filed.
Therefore, I was planning to file a federal lawsuit addressing the Boulder,
Colorado Order.
From: REDACTED Date: Fri, Jan 22, 2010 at 1:44 PMSubject: Re: ReferenceTo: Kelley Lynch <[email protected]>
Kelley: To whom do I write? Lemme know.
- 16 -Exhibit HHHH: Schedule of Perjured Statements in Declarations
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
As to fraudulent TRO's: If the case is in federal court, a bond is generally required, but the plaintiff's liability is generally limited to the amount of the bond. And state courts often do you require the posting of a bond. However, court rules generally provide for immediate hearings to test the sufficiency of the TRO. That means that if someone has lied to obtain a TRO, the restrained party can get into court to show the true facts on a moment's notice. Also, TROs are generally limited in duration (10 days in federal court) before a full hearing has to be conducted.
If someone allowed a TRO to go unchallenged, they have a real problem, but mostly because of the improper restraint they were forced to endure. But you can always go into court to challenge it. From the little you have described, it sounds as if no challenge was made. But the challenge is the proper way of . . . well, "challenging" the propriety of the restraint. That is, seeking remedies for an allegedly wrongful restraint without challenging the restraint itself is like putting up a barrier across the tracks to stop a runaway train. Rather than building a barrier that might or might not work, put the brakes on the train. You should go to the source of the problem, which in this case was the wrongful restraint. Successfully going after the “other guy” would logically lead to a vacation of the restraint . . . but only indirectly. Why not take the easiest route and attack the restraint directly? REDACTED.
If your “client” was subjected to an improper restraint, attack the restraint. If you don't, the “other guy” will raise the restraint to show that they acted properly. And a second judge (i.e., not the one who granted the TRO) won't want to (and therefore probably won't) even listen to the claim.
But I have to tell you I disagree totally with your comment that TROs are “abusive and outrageous (il?)legally.” They should be rarely granted, but when they are justified, they are the only way of avoiding some really serious harm. Without them, a court would be unable to afford real relief, even if it were justified. As you know, I have been earning a living for 30 years obtaining TROs, so you're talking to the wrong person in any event.
Regards,
REDACTED
Kelley Lynch wrote:P.S. Excuse the english usage. I'm tired and just recovered from the shock of reading Rutger's deposition.
- 17 -Exhibit HHHH: Schedule of Perjured Statements in Declarations
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
24. Immediately after receiving Rice’s February 14, 2011 email, I phoned the
Los Angeles Court and was advised that there was no California order and the
Colorado order had not been registered. That was factual and it was not until
my arrest on May 25, 2011 that I was advised by Berkeley Police Department
that there was a Boulder, Colorado order in place. Many of my communications
to Cohen and his lawyers had to do with the fact that I was not in receipt of a
1099 from Cohen for the year 2004. I also attempted to address the fact that
illegal K-1s were transmitted to the State of Kentucky and IRS by LC
Investments, LLC for the years 2003, 2004, and 2005. Those K-1s indicate that
I am a 99.5% owner of that entity and show $0 income for all three years –
completely undermining the fraudulent expense ledger. I am NOT a partner on
this entity. I have repeatedly requested that Cohen rescind these K-1s and he
willfully refuses to do so. Additionally, Leonard Cohen’s personal tax attorney
prepared K-1s on behalf of Traditional Holdings, LLC. Those K-1s were
attached to the tax returns he prepared and transmitted to IRS. They prove
that phantom income was shifted to me but distributions were not made. These
matters remain outstanding.
25. On May 25, 2011, the Boulder, Colorado order was registered with the
Family Court and somehow transformed into a domestic violence order. There
was and is no domestic violence and the Boulder, Colorado order was NOT a
domestic violence order. Leonard Cohen and I were never in a statutory
required brief intimate dating relationship. I personally believe his statements
- 18 -Exhibit HHHH: Schedule of Perjured Statements in Declarations
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
that I was his “lover” are nothing other than his defense to allegations related
to sexual harassment and indecent exposure. The fact that he had me read
legal and business documents to him while he soaked in bubble baths was
raised in Neal Greenberg’s Colorado lawsuit. Leonard Cohen’s testimony
during my 2012 trial about our statutory required dating or engagement
relationship only proves that he perjured himself over this issue.
PD: Now, you also mentioned earlier that there was a brief intimate relationship between you and Ms. Lynch, correct?Cohen: That's correct.PD: Now, being that she was your business manager, you wouldn't say that was probably the bestidea, to have a romantic relationship with your business partner, correct?Cohen: I don't think it goes to the description of romantic.PD: Okay. But it was a sexual relationship, correct? (NOTE: Taken right out of LAPD TMU's alleged report)Cohen: It was an intimate relationship, yes.PD: Was it a sexual relationship?Cohen: It involved a sexual -- yes.PD: Now, it was -- it was actually spanning years, correct?Cohen: I'm sorry?PD: It actually spanned years, correct?Cohen: I don't know how long it spanned, Sir. (NOTE: Strange since Streeter seemed to)PD: Okay. But you would agree with me that it was on and off for a period of time?Cohen: Yes, Sir.PD: Now, why did that -- that part of the relationship, what you called the intimate part of the relations, why did that end or when did that end? ... When did it end?Cohen: I don't remember exactly when it ended. Like many relationships, it -- it just dissolved.PD: But it's fair to say that it ended before your business relationship ended, correct?Cohen: That's correct.PD: Okay. And do you know why it ended?Cohen: I would say that part of the relationship exhausted itself and dissolved naturally. RT 274-276
PD: Now, do you remember testifying on March 23rd at another hearing?Cohen: March 23rd, yes.
- 19 -Exhibit HHHH: Schedule of Perjured Statements in Declarations
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
PD: Of this year. You were in this courthouse testifying, correct?Cohen: That is correct.PD: Now, you were asked if this was -- if your relationship with Ms. Lynch was purely a businessrelationship. Do you remember that?Cohen: I did.PD: And you actually said that it was, yes, purely a business relationship?Cohen: I have said repeatedly that there was an intimate relationship, but the lady denies it. So I didnot want to insist. PD: I'm not asking you about what Ms. Lynch said. I'm asking aboutwhat you said.Cohen: May I explain?PD: I'm just asking you if that's what you said on March 23rd.Cohen: Yes.PD: In fact, you were asked a follow-up question that -- asking you if that was the extent of it,and again you said yes, that was the extent of it, correct?Cohen: Correct. RT 276-277
PD: When you testified on March 23rd, you said that -- you didn’t give the same answer that you gave now, correct, regarding your relationship with Ms. Lynch.Cohen: That’s correct.PD: When you did testify, you stood in front of the counsel table, you raised your right hand, correct?PD: You swore to tell the truth, the whole truth.Cohen: Correct.PD: And then the same oath that you just took right now, correct? Before testifying, correct?Cohen: Correct.PD: And yet you gave two different answers, yes or no?Cohen: Correct.PD: And you understand that you were under the penalty of perjury on March 23rd?Streeter: Objection; argumentative.Court: Sustained. RT 321/322
See Kelley Lynch Declaration, Exhibit F.
26. I was arrested on March 1, 2012 for violating a valid Los Angeles,
California domestic violence order. I was prosecuted and sentenced for
willfully and knowingly violating a valid domestic violence order. I was
repeatedly advised that the Boulder, Colorado order expired on February 15,
- 20 -Exhibit HHHH: Schedule of Perjured Statements in Declarations
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2009. I had Paulette Brandt confirm this fact on numerous occasions. And, had
the prosecutor provided my public defenders with Brady material, Berkeley PD
was clear that I was unaware that any valid restraining order existed.
ADDRESS THE STATE WAGE GARNISHMENT. I had no intention of annoying
Leonard Cohen and the mere thought of that is absurd. Leonard Cohen may
have fantasies that I am unaware of but all attempts to communicate with him
were legitimate. During sentencing, Judge Robert Vanderet provided Kory and
Rice with domestic violence related restraining orders. Those orders are
fraudulent and I was deprived of the right to a hearing on the matter.
27. Michelle Rice and Robert Kory now serve as Leonard Cohen’s paid
witnesses and lawyers. The Court may review the domestic violence related
orders that Judge Robert Vanderet granted Robert Kory and Michelle Rice. I
have asked the DOJ and FBI to review all fraudulent domestic violence and
domestic violence related orders that involve me, Leonard Cohen, and his legal
representatives.
28. I was not a resident of Los Angeles, California at the time of my arrest
and the domestic violence related orders are not valid. They were related to
my sentencing and probation hearing. At that time, I was sentenced under
domestic violence statutes, required to participate in domestic violence related
programs, and did not knowingly or willfully violate an Order given the fact
that Boulder Combined Court has repeatedly confirmed for me, and Paulette
Brandt, that this Order expired on February 15, 2009.
- 21 -Exhibit HHHH: Schedule of Perjured Statements in Declarations
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29. My appellate attorney was forced to prepare an appeal without the
benefit of my file. The Public Defender’s office continues to refuse to provide
me with a complete copy of my file. Francisco Suarez felt that the record was a
mess and advised me that he personally felt the trial was nothing other than an
IRS matter that demands an investigation. One of my public defenders advised
me that he felt the City Attorney was attempting to sabotage the IRS while
discrediting me and the District Attorney did not want the Phil Spector verdict
overturned. My public defender also advised me that he personally believed
there may have been a prosecution plant on the jury. During debriefing, jurors
advised my public defenders that they wanted to hear from Internal Revenue
Service. They were told, by the prosecutor, Cohen, and his paid witness
lawyers, that I was not in need of any tax or business information. That was
and remains a bald-faced lie. The IRS and FTB refunds have now been
challenged as fraud. I have filed an Identity Theft Affidavit with respect to
Cohen’s use of my social security number on a number of tax forms. I have
been forced to amend, as of this date, one federal tax return. I have notified
the City and County of Los Angeles that I intend to file suit against them. I
intend to file complaints with the Criminal Grand Jury of Los Angeles and the
District Attorney’s Justice Integrity Unit. I continue to document everything for
IRS, FBI, DOJ, Treasury, FTB, and Dennis Riordan. I have asked for a formal
investigation into these matters. I have no idea why Rice raised the issues she
has in her declaration but it is replete with perjured statements and fraudulent
misrepresentations.
- 22 -Exhibit HHHH: Schedule of Perjured Statements in Declarations
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29. This declaration was filed, under the penalty of perjury, on January 4,
2004 and filed with Plaintiffs’ Opposition documents.
PERJURED STATEMENTS AND FRAUDULENT MISREPRESENTATIONSIN THE
DECLARATION OF LEONARD COHEN
30. According to Plaintiffs’ Opposition to Lynch’s Motion to Vacate, Leonard
Cohen’s declaration “describes the prejudice to Cohen if the Default Judgment
were to be vacated at this late date.”
31. Leonard Cohen’s declaration, filed with this Court on or about January 6,
2014, states as follows: “From mid-1988 through October 2004, I employed
Kelley Lynch as my personal manager and
met with her on an almost daily basis when I was in Los Angeles.” During my
2012 trial, Cohen advised the jurors that he did not hire me as his “personal
manager” but hired me as his “business manager” in 1988 or 1989. I have
addressed this matter in my declaration. Cohen’s testimony during my 2012
trial, as it relates to this matter, is as follows:
PD: Now I want to talk to you a little bit about your relationship with Ms. Lynch. Now, you – actually, you hired her to be your personal manager in 1988, correct? Cohen: No. PD: Well, when did you hire her? Cohen: I hired her to be my business manager. PD: In what year? Cohen: I think it was 1988 or ’89. RT 270
32. Leonard Cohen filed this declaration in January 2014. Cohen testified at
the March 23, 2012 hearing that he had not seen me since 2004. It doesn’t
matter what I looked like when he knew me. It matters what I looked like on
August 24, 2005. At that time, I was very thin (probably 102 pounds), wore my
hair extremely dark (almost black), kept my hair extremely short (similar to Mia
- 23 -Exhibit HHHH: Schedule of Perjured Statements in Declarations
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Farrow’s hair in Rosemary’s Baby), and had very blue eyes. Cohen
acknowledges in this declaration that I frequently changed my hair color. He
was unaware of my appearance in August 2004 and the process server
obviously relied on the description provided. One photograph presented to this
Court relates to my attendance at a New Year’s Eve party in the late 90s and
other other evidently was taken a number of years after Cohen parted ways.
Neither relates to the way I looked, or wore my hair, in August 2005.
33. Leonard Cohen’s declaration states that: “I have relied on the Default
Judgment as to filing my personal income tax returns from 2005 forward, and
as to amendments of my personal income tax returns for 2003 and 2004.”
Leonard Cohen has used the Complaint in this matter, as well as some version
of the “expense ledger,” to file his 2005 tax returns (and others evidently) and
amend his tax returns for 2003 and 2004. I believe that goes to his motive for
filing this lawsuit and obtaining a default judgment against me. I have
challenged the refunds he received from IRS and FBI as fraud and reported the
use of my social security number on any attendant documents transmitted to
IRS as fraud. As of the filing of this declaration, I would assume that Leonard
Cohen was well aware of that fact. Leonard Cohen has set forth his motive
with respect to me and this case: the IRS. The judgment is void and that
means that Judge Babcock’s Order in Colorado is void as well. As the FBI
noted, this is taking place all across the country. Leonard Cohen personally
devoted hundreds of hours to this matter and the reason for that is because
Leonard Cohen may have a history of tax fraud in the United States dating back
- 24 -Exhibit HHHH: Schedule of Perjured Statements in Declarations
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
approximately 40 or so years. That might explain why he destroyed my life
over this situation. Cohen prefers a more poetic rendering of his role: he
believes he’s not the “author” of my “misfortunes.” It doesn’t matter how
Leonard Cohen is. That doesn’t change the facts of the matter. His arguments
tend to involve portraying himself as the world’s oldest baby.
34. Leonard Cohen’s declaration, dated January 4, 2014, and signed under
the penalty of perjury, is replete with perjured statements with respect to my
ownership interests in numerous corporations, what actually unfolded, and
other matters related to Internal Revenue Service and federal tax matters.
These issues have been broadly addressed in my Motion, declarations, and
exhibits attached there.
PERJURED STATEMENTS AND FRAUDULENT MISREPRESENTATIONSIN THE
DECLARATION OF ROBERT KORY
Exhibit A – Declaration of Kevin Prins (supporting default judgment and attaching “expense ledger”)Exhibit B – Email to Rutger dated March 7, 2006; Agent Sopko’s Email dated March 6, 2007Exhibit C – Robert Kory letter to Agent Tejeda/IRS dated March 9, 2007Exhibit D – Traditional Holdings, LLC 1099 to Leonard CohenExhibit E – Robert Kory letter to IRS dated December 20, 2008 re. TH 1099. Kory notes that the 1099 violates the restraining order.
35. According to Plaintiffs’ Opposition to Lynch’s Motion to Vacate, Robert
Kory’s declaration “rebuts Lynch’s allegations that Cohen committed tax fraud,
that key legal entities owned by Cohen were formed for an improper purpose,
and that the Court improperly imposed a constructive trust on those entities for
Cohen’s benefit through the Default Judgment.”
- 25 -Exhibit HHHH: Schedule of Perjured Statements in Declarations
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
36. Robert Kory’s Declaration attached Kevin Prins’ declaration which is
addressed below. It also addresses Cohen’s defense, to IRS Agent Luis Tejeda,
of his client (Leonard Cohen) with respect to the allegations I reported related
to Leonard Cohen’s criminal and civil tax fraud. Federal tax matters continue
to be argued before LA Superior Court as I addressed in the January 27, 2014
motion hearing. Robert Kory’s conclusions about Internal Revenue Service are
nothing other than hearsay. He does not work for or represent Internal
Revenue Service. He was very clear with Agent Tejeda, however, that Agent
Kelly’s Sopko’s email to me was a game changer.
37. Robert Kory’s declaration allegedly rebutted allegations that Leonard
Cohen committed criminal tax fraud, retaliated against her, key legal entities
related to Cohen were formed for improper purposes, and the Court improperly
imposed a constructive trust on those entities for Cohen's benefit through the
default judgment.
38. Kory’s Declaration begins by explaining his relationship with Leonard
Cohen which began when he started representing Cohen in a dispute with me
(and others). Kory, who was not involved with Cohen for the entire 20 years I
knew him, starts off by falsely accusing me of misappropriating funds from
Leonard Cohen’s personal and retirement accounts. Traditional Holdings, LLC,
a partnership, is evidently Cohen’s “retirement account” although the annuity
obligation was extinguished from the 2003 federal tax return (by Cohen’s
personal corporate tax and corporate lawyer, Kelley Lynch) and the sum of
approximately $4.8 million was moved to the capital account. He willfully
- 26 -Exhibit HHHH: Schedule of Perjured Statements in Declarations
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
disregards all corporate books, records, stock certificates and ledgers, Annuity
Agreement, TH’s Indemnity Agreement, and other relevant information and
evidence. Kory launches into a highly fabricated narrative, under the oath of
perjury, that seems to involve Richard Westin and Neal Greenberg enabling me
and creating an estate plan for Cohen that gave me “unfettered control” over
Cohen’s alleged accounts. These entities, apart from Cohen’s solely owned LC
Investments, LLC, had nothing whatsoever to do with Cohen’s estate planning.
Traditional Holdings, LLC had an annuity obligation. Cohen signed the Annuity
Agreement which clearly states that this entity bypasses his estate. Cohen has
received loans from Traditional Holdings, LLC (or expended assets) totaling
approximately $6.7 million. The Annuity Agreement, and formation documents,
clearly permit Cohen to take loans/advances but they had to be repaid within 3
years. The agreed upon interest was 6%. Cohen refuses to address this issue.
The repeated use of the word “control” with respect to Lynch appears to relate
to IRS determinations with respect to corporate governance and how
individuals participated in decisions that resulted in their individual benefits or
non-compliance with tax regulations. Leonard Cohen has attempted to distance
himself from his own involvement with the creation, formation, and governance
of numerous corporate entities. He has blatantly retaliated against me knowing
that I reported numerous allegations, related to criminal tax fraud and his tax
evasion, to IRS and other tax authorities on April 15, 2005. Governance,
according to IRS, is the exercise of authority and control over an organization.
Leonard Cohen’s lawsuit, and response to my August 13, 2009 Motion to
- 27 -Exhibit HHHH: Schedule of Perjured Statements in Declarations
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Vacate, serves simultaneously to defend himself against allegations that he
committed criminal tax fraud, utilized corporate structures to evade taxation,
and engaged in other unlawful conduct as well as serves as a vehicle to address
the allegations of conspiracy, extortion, etc. raised in Natural Wealth’s June
2005 lawsuit. Leonard Cohen is the individual who made governance decisions
on behalf of these entities and its shareholders or members. His personal tax
lawyer, Richard Westin, handled all corporate and tax matters and worked
solely for the benefit of Leonard Cohen. Leonard Cohen not only failed to
protect the assets of these entities but has now wrongfully conveyed Lynch’s
property to himself.
39. Leonard Cohen, Richard Westin, and Neal Greenberg were wrapped in
attorney/client privilege. I was not and was essentially left in the dark. I was
provided little, if any, guidance with respect to corporate matters and relied
entirely upon Leonard Cohen, Richard Westin, and Neal Greenberg. Leonard
Cohen’s tax lawyer, Richard Westin, prepared the corporate organizing
documents that provided the framework for governance and management.
Westin also prepared the by-laws and minutes governing and documenting the
internal affairs of the companies.
40. It is Leonard Cohen who has a conflict of interest with respect to the
numerous corporate entity. He is the person whose position of authority over
these entities. Richard Westin failed to provide the most basic guidance to
Lynch. For example, she was never provided with a written document-
retention policy that would protect the governance records. Nevertheless,
- 28 -Exhibit HHHH: Schedule of Perjured Statements in Declarations
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Lynch kept all documents related to the corporate entities in the corporate
books and files that Leonard Cohen removed from Lynch’s offices in October
2004.
DECLARATION OF ROBERT KORY
41. Robert Kory is a lawyer who was hired in or around November 2004 to
defend his client, Leonard Cohen, and is not a witness to anything that
occurred with respect to Kelley Lynch, Leonard Cohen, or the corporate
entities created prior to that time. Lynch never heard of or met Robert Kory, or
anyone from his firm, in the 20 years she knew and/or worked with Leonard
Cohen. Robert Kory and his partner, Michelle Rice, now serve as Cohen’s
lawyers and paid witnesses.
42. On October 27, 2004, after spending well over two weeks pursuing a
meeting, DiMascio & Berardo sent the attached letter to Richard Westin. The
dispute between Cohen and me, at that time, had to do with her involvement in
numerous entities and any potential liability she may have been exposed to. I
had no involvement in any Leonard Cohen alleged retirement account apart
from her 99.5% ownership interest in Traditional Holdings, LLC. I engaged in
no wrongdoing and the entirely fabricated narrative in the Complaint serves to
defend Leonard Cohen, among other things, against the allegations that he
committed criminal tax fraud. After spending months attempting to coerce
Lynch into a settlement, that involved testifying against Cohen’s
representatives, Leonard Cohen retaliated against me with the instant matter.
Leonard Cohen’s representatives, Richard Westin and Neal Greenberg, did not
- 29 -Exhibit HHHH: Schedule of Perjured Statements in Declarations
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
enable me in any non-existent wrongdoing. They worked for Leonard Cohen
and their strategies benefitted Cohen personally. I did not have “unfettered
control” over Cohen accounts. I assisted Leonard Cohen and his
representatives and followed their instructions and directions. This issue
appears to relate to tax matters and my assistance does not equal “unfettered
control.” Furthermore, corporate accounts are not Leonard Cohen’s personal
accounts and this argument clearly concludes that Cohen personally is the alter
ego of numerous entities who engaged in self-dealing.
43. Leonard Cohen was not advised to sell his copyrights or royalty
interests. Leonard Cohen personally demanded these sales and complex stock
deals. In 1994, Cohen had me fly to New York to meet with Eric Kronfeld, the
former CEO of Polygram who was purchasing publishing assets. The first Sony
Sale in 1996 did not relate to Leonard Cohen’s estate planning. LC Stranger
Music, Inc. and his d/b/a Bad Monk Publishing were not part of Cohen’s estate.
His reason for pursuing these deals had to do with the lucrative publishing
deals being entered into at the time and the highly publicized Bowie Bond.
Leonard Cohen’s declaration in the CAK bond deal is evidence that he
personally pursued these deals and directed his representatives. The proceeds
from the first Sony deal were not contributed to a family trust. Leonard Cohen,
together with Richard Westin, Neal Greenberg, and others, restructured LC
Stranger Music, Inc., in anticipation of this sale, so that the stockholders were
Leonard Cohen, two charitable remainder trusts (structured primarily by Ed
Dean, referred to Cohen by Greenberg), and the Mt. Baldy Zen Center. At that
- 30 -Exhibit HHHH: Schedule of Perjured Statements in Declarations
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
time, Leonard Cohen failed to advise me, and possibly others, that Machat &
Machat had a 15% ownership interest in Stranger Music, Inc. which was the
original name of the entity prior to its registration in California as LC Stranger
Music, Inc.
44. A company called Traditional Holdings, LLC was allegedly established
to sell intellectual property to Sony in return for a private annuity for the
benefit of Leonard Cohen. However, Robert Kory fails to note that the
intellectual property sold by Traditional Holdings, LLC was actually owned by
Blue Mist Touring Company, Inc. and therefore any attempts to assign the
assets to any other entity failed. Leonard Cohen and Kelley Lynch entered into
an Annuity Agreement on December 7, 2000, prior to the formation of this
entity. I was induced, by Cohen and his representatives, into entering that (and
other) agreement. I was given promises that Cohen and his representative,
Richard Westin, would handle the formal unwinding of Blue Mist Touring
Company, Inc. and validly and legally transfer the intellectual property assets
into Traditional Holdings, LLC. That never happened. I was included on
federal tax returns, prepared by Richard Westin, for the years 2001, 2002, and
2003. I received K-1 partnership documents, prepared by Cohen’s
representatives, and paid taxes on income. Phantom income was also shifted to
me and not distributed raising serious issues that most certain have not been
litigated.
44. The Annuity Agreement, signed by Cohen and myself and notarized,
essentially set forth monthly annuity payments to Leonard Cohen, which would
- 31 -Exhibit HHHH: Schedule of Perjured Statements in Declarations
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
begin in January 2011, ultimately totaling approximately $4.7 million. That
Agreement authorized loans and/or advances from this entity and, with respect
to Leonard Cohen, his loans/advances had to be repaid within 3 years with
interest. The agreed upon interest was 6%. Leonard Cohen was well aware of
this fact and understood that his loans/advances had to be documented with
promissory notes. This is not something I would have handled and addressed
this with Cohen and his representatives, including in a January 2012 email
thread with Cohen and Westin. The Annuity Agreement also sets forth the fact
that annuity payments can be withheld until Cohen’s loans/advances, if any, are
repaid in full. As of the date the Complaint was filed in this matter, Cohen’s
loans/expenditures with respect to Traditional Holdings, LLC totaled
approximately $6.7 million. To date, Leonard Cohen and his representatives
refuse to address this fact and seem to believe that debt accumulated prior to
the filing of the Complaint in this matter is something that Cohen has no
obligation to relate with or repay. Robert Kory’s statement that Traditional
Holdings, LLC was to provide long term annuity income to Mr. Cohen with the
corpus, if any remaining on his death, going to his two children is clearly
contradicted by the Annuity Agreement Leonard Cohen personally signed.
However, the Complaint, and other documents filed in this matter, relies on a
fabricated narrative that in no way relies on the actual evidence or facts.
45. Robert Kory’s declaration conceals the totality of circumstances with
respect to the facts and evidence as well as with respect to the formation of LC
Investments, LLC. From approximately 1994 until Lynch and Cohen parted
- 32 -Exhibit HHHH: Schedule of Perjured Statements in Declarations
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
ways, in October 2004, Leonard Cohen pursued a variety of potential deals with
numerous potential buyers. His demanded that a stock deal be used to
accommodate these potential deals was detrimental to the negotiations,
reduced the number of interested parties, and unnecessarily complicated the
sales. In approximately 1998, Leonard Cohen became interested in what was
known as the Bowie Bond. In or around 1996, David Pullman entered into an
agreement with David Bowie that came to be known as the Bowie Bond. This
bond deal securitized the royalty income from Bowie’s catalogue that resulted
in a $55 million transaction. The bond securitizations allowed artists to attain
immediate financial compensation for their life’s work and permitted artists to
obtain substantial loans while ultimately maintaining ownership interest in
their intellectual property. The Bowie deal was followed by the Motown
transaction in June 1998. While Cohen had decided, in or around 1994, to
pursue the possible sale of intellectual property, he became extremely
interested in the Bowie Bond and entered into negotiations with both David
Pullman of the Pullman Group and Charles Koppelman of CAK/Universal.
Cohen details some of this in the declaration he submitted in response to
Koppelman’s breach of contract suit.
46. Ultimately, Cohen decided to pursue a bond securitization deal with
CAK. By that time, he had assigned all intellectual property to Blue Mist
Touring Company, Inc. Sony was also interested in these assets and began due
diligence with this entity in anticipation of a potential deal. CAK demanded a
bankruptcy proof entity. This created certain issues as the assets were owned
- 33 -Exhibit HHHH: Schedule of Perjured Statements in Declarations
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
by Blue Mist Touring Company, Inc. and matters were further complicated
when the Canadian performing rights society (SOCAN) refused to pay through
royalties to an entity not wholly owned by the writer, Leonard Cohen. This was
an internal policy of SOCAN’s. Given the fact that Cohen planned to close the
CAK deal in November 1999, it was agreed that LC Investments, LLC would
collect certain royalties with respect to assets owned by Blue Mist Touring
Company, Inc. and Cohen’s representatives would handle any outstanding
issues with respect to corporate assignments, etc. At some point in early
November 1999, Stuart Bondell (head of business affairs at Sony Music
International) phoned me to advise that Sony was concerned about Cohen’s
interest in the CAK deal. They did not want Cohen setting precedence with this
type of deal as advances, which CAK wanted paid through to them, are the
currency of the music industry. Sony offered to ultimately purchase intellectual
property assets for $8 million. At that time, the exact assets were not identified
and it took approximately two years to arrive at a final deal. I immediately
spoke to Cohen who advised her that he would enter into the deal with Sony if
they agreed to pay him a non-refundable, good faith deposit of $1 million
proving that they intend to pursue this deal. I communicated these terms to
Sony and they agreed to wire $1 million into Leonard Cohen’s personal bank
account. This deposit was a prepayment against the Traditional Holdings, LLC
deal which closed in 2001. Cohen’s position with respect to much of this was
memorialized in the declaration he provided the Court in the CAK breach of
contract matter. That declaration clearly states that Cohen is aware he has
- 34 -Exhibit HHHH: Schedule of Perjured Statements in Declarations
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
substantial royalty income and is the individual making the decisions with
respect to these deals. The CAK deal fell apart, Cohen settled with CAK, and
LC Investments, LLC owned nothing and merely continued to collect royalties
related to assets owned by Blue Mist Touring Company, Inc. Robert Kory’s
declaration refers to a cancelled potential sale in 2005. This deal, which Cohen
was examining, was to be the third and final intellectual property sale and did
not necessarily relate to LC Investments, LLC. Sony/ATV submitted their first
offer, after years of negotiations, on October 21, 2004. This particular deal had
nothing whatsoever to do with Leonard Cohen’s estate planning. Traditional
Holdings, LLC was merely the vehicle, following the concerns about collapsible
corporations, that Cohen used with respect to the 2001 Sony deal.
47. Leonard Cohen, when Lynch and Greg McBowman, advised him not to
sell intellectual property, did mention that he was concerned about the future
of the music industry due to the internet and digital downloading. The Bowie
Bond, and other highly publicized publishing deals, did not have anything to do
with estate planning. In fact, David Bowie entered into his deal with Pullman
due to the fact that he and his manager parted ways and his manager owned a
percentage of his intellectual property. Neal Greenberg and Richard Westin,
who were wrapped in attorney/client privilege with Leonard Cohen, did come
up with a variety of proposals which Cohen then pursued.
48. I have no idea what Kory questioned but perhaps he was motivated by
his desire to secure Cohen’s managerial and legal work in the future. In any
event, Leonard Cohen understood what his transaction fees were. He
- 35 -Exhibit HHHH: Schedule of Perjured Statements in Declarations
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
personally hired his representatives, frequently entered into agreements with
them, and understood that his representatives had to be paid. While the Sony
deal grossed $8 million, it is important to note that Leonard Cohen personally
received the $1 million prepayment and never transferred that to Traditional
Holdings, LLC. Furthermore, his personal transaction fees (which were not
corporate expenses totaled – according to Kory - $3.3 million). Leonard Cohen
personally signed the fax authorizing Neal Greenberg to pay these transaction
fees on his behalf. Greenberg then provided a checkbook with which these
payments were made. Additional monies were withheld from the gross
payments to Traditional Holdings, LLC with respect to Leonard Cohen’s
personal Sony account recoupments and in connection with at least two live
albums which were valued at approximately $375,000 each. I believe at least
one live album was delivered and has no idea what happened to payment with
respect to the other live album. Leonard Cohen, according to the Annuity
Agreement he entered into, was entitled to an annuity obligation of
approximately $4.7 million. As of the date the Complaint was filed, Cohen had
received the benefit of approximately $6.7 million. His complaint fails to
address other corporate distributions and payments. Cohen further failed to
address the following steps taken on the federal tax returns by his personal tax
lawyer who he hired to prepare corporate returns: In 2001, Cohen failed to
report the income from the Sony sale; in 2002 (using a separate tax ID
number), Cohen extinguished my promissory note (the vehicle with which she
invested in this entity); and, in 2003, Cohen extinguished the annuity obligation
- 36 -Exhibit HHHH: Schedule of Perjured Statements in Declarations
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
itself. All of this was brought to my attention by my lawyers and accountant (in
or around September 2004) and it was done without my knowledge, awareness,
or permission. As of this date, evidently based on the fraudulent default
judgment, Cohen refuses to provide Lynch with tax information in connection
with Blue Mist Touring Company, Inc., Traditional Holdings, LLC, and Old
Ideas, LLC. Nothing was under my control and Cohen’s investment adviser,
who represented Leonard Cohen and not me, was the trusted guardian of
assets, according to Leonard Cohen.
49. DiMascio & Berardo’s October 27, 2004 sets forth the issues that were
being addressed when Cohen and I parted ways. It was at the meeting this
letter addressed, on or about October 30, 2004, that Cohen and his
representatives (including Richard Westin) came up with their novel defense:
willfully disregard all corporate books and records, my ownership interest in
numerous entities, and accuse me of receiving overpayments with respect to
my fees as Cohen’s personal manager. They evidently needed to argue fraud
and rescission to unwind this transaction with Internal Revenue Service and
other tax authorities. It would be impossible, based on what Cohen personally
withdrew/expended, for Leonard Cohen to believe there was $5 million in
assets in Traditional Holdings, LLC. Cohen had initially hired Greenberg,
Glusker, who accompanied him to the meeting with my lawyers, to represent
him and then evidently replaced them with his girlfriend’s ex-husband, Robert
Kory.
- 37 -Exhibit HHHH: Schedule of Perjured Statements in Declarations
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
50. In the fall of 2004, Leonard Cohen heard that I had discussed possibly
reporting what she felt was tax fraud to Internal Revenue Service. Cohen also
understood that I had changed accountants and hired lawyers. He flew into
Los Angeles and, thereafter, attempted to coerce me into meeting privately
with him and his tax lawyer, Richard Westin, who planned to be in Los Angeles
to meet with Cohen the weekend of October 30, 2004. According to Cohen, he
and Westin planned to unravel certain corporate entities. He demanded that I
hand over the corporate books and records to him but, in the alternative, I
asked my lawyers to transmit the corporate books and records in my possession
(Traditional Holdings, LLC, LC Investments, LLC, and Blue Mist Touring
Company, Inc.) to Greenberg, Glusker which they did. Leonard Cohen, who
had received monthly financial statements from Greenberg (which frequently
co-mingled accounts) since 1996, was well aware of the fact that the monthly
courtesy emails addressed asset valuations and did not replace financial
statements. Traditional Holdings, LLC, and other corporate entities, were not
Leonard Cohen’s personal accounts. I had no control over any account with
Greenberg; was merely an authorized signatory on Cohen’s personal bank
account; and agreed to become Power of Attorney in or around January 2002
because Cohen was travelling; there were closings connected to homes Cohen
was purchasing for his son and girlfriend; and in order to assist Cohen. This
assistance did not mean that I effectively controlled anything. My ownership
interest in numerous corporate entities were not held in trust for Cohen’s
benefit. Leonard Cohen has merely attempted to benefit from his wrongdoing.
- 38 -Exhibit HHHH: Schedule of Perjured Statements in Declarations
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
51. See Kevin Prins declaration, attached to Kory’s declaration, and the
fraudulent expense ledger referenced therein. No accounts were under my
control and corporate accounts related to these entities were not Leonard
Cohen’s personal accounts or piggy banks. I was entitled to receive 15%
commission of all Leonard Cohen’s gross income. I was also entitled to receive
my 15% ownership interest in intellectual property as evidenced by her
ownership interest in Blue Mist Touring Company, Inc. and the non-revocable
assignments. I was entitled to receive advances against my ownership interest.
That includes with respect to the royalties collected by Leonard Cohen and LC
Investments, LLC, and other entities, with respect to assets owned by Blue Mist
Touring Company, Inc.
52. The expense ledger is entirely fraudulent and does not take into
consideration my ownership interest in numerous entities and conceals assets
Cohen personally expended or collected with respect to assets owned by Blue
Mist Touring Company, Inc. While this alleged accounting was being
undertaken, Cohen refused to provide me or her representatives with corporate
bank statements, royalty statements, and other information required to prepare
a proper accounting that would into consideration assets, liabilities and equity.
His accountant, Kevin Prins, met with my accountant in San Francisco and
advised him that he was not in possession of back-up documentation with
respect to the corporate entities; had to review the federal tax returns; and,
was copied in on correspondence addressing issues such as phantom income
shifted to me by Traditional Holdings, LLC but not distributed to her. Former
- 39 -Exhibit HHHH: Schedule of Perjured Statements in Declarations
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
District Attorney Ira Reiner, who was evidently representing Cohen in secret
meditations, was also copied in on this correspondence that addressed these,
and other issues, and falsely alleged that Grubman Indursky and Greg
McBowman engaged in fraud in the inducement. The allegation is laughable.
53. According to my lawyers, Robert Kory and Michael Mesnick were so
concerned about alerting the Internal Revenue Service to possible irregularities
that they did not want to approach IRS to request copies of Traditional
Holdings, LLC tax returns. In April 2012, I discovered that Cohen (using the
Complaint in this matter and some version of the fraudulent ledger) obtained a
substantial refund from IRS. I have now challenged that refund as fraudulent
and advised IRS that Cohen illegally used my social security number. I have
received confirmation from the Internal Revenue Service that they have noted
the illegal use of my social security number on my tax accounts.
54. When Kory filed this declaration, in response to my Motion to Vacate, I
discovered that Cohen also evidently received a tax refund (using the
Complaint in this matter and some version of the fraudulent ledger – six months
in advance of receiving the default judgment) from the California Franchise Tax
Board. That refund has also been challenged as fraudulent with the Franchise
Tax Board’s fraud unit. Leonard Cohen did not incur a theft loss; may have
advised IRS that he was not pursuing third party recovery of these assets;
corporate entities are not Leonard Cohen’s personal accounts; and Leonard
Cohen has concealed my ownership interest in corporate entities and provided
the Court with a fabricated and fraudulent ledger supporting the default
- 40 -Exhibit HHHH: Schedule of Perjured Statements in Declarations
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
judgment. This information has also been used against me to defend Leonard
Cohen against allegations that he committed criminal tax fraud. This issue, and
all issues related to federal tax returns, have not been litigated in federal court.
Leonard Cohen failed to report the 2001 Sony income from the sale on the
Traditional Holdings, LLC federal tax returns and did not pay the federal and
state taxes on any advance, distribution, or shareholder loan Lynch received.
55. Leonard Cohen’s accountant, Mike Mesnick, clearly played a role in the
decision to willfully disregard corporate records and in filing Cohen’s 2005 tax
returns (amending others) and obtaining wholly fraudulent tax refunds based
on perjured and fraudulent evidence submitted to IRS and FTB. I have
addressed the refunds Cohen received from IRS and FTB that have been
challenged as fraud. Kory’s declaration confirms that the entirely fabricated
unchallenged Complaint was used to obtain fraudulent tax returns. Clearly, an
unchallenged Complaint, in a lawsuit I was not served, and the May 2006
default, do not serve to satisfactorily argue the federal tax matters. The motive
on the part of Cohen and his representatives is entirely obvious however. I
have addressed the fact that Cohen’s personal 2003, 2004, and 2005 federal
and tax returns are evidence of tax fraud with IRS and FTB as well. I did file an
Identity Theft Affidavit with the Internal Revenue Service regarding the use of
my social security number on any “theft loss” form filed by Leonard Cohen as
well as the illegal use of her social security number on K-1s transmitted to
Internal Revenue Service by LC Investments, LLC indicating that I am a
partner in this entity for the years 2004 and 2005.
- 41 -Exhibit HHHH: Schedule of Perjured Statements in Declarations
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
56. Leonard Cohen, and his representatives, have argued with IRS that the
Complaint and default judgment are a defense against the allegations I brought
to their attention on April 15, 2005 and thereafter. In the present matter, Kory
is arguing that the IRS and FTB refunds are evidence that I was served this
lawsuit and these corporations are not sham entities. I totally disagreed.
57. Due to the default judgment, which evidently states that Cohen has no
obligations to me, Leonard Cohen now refuses to provide me with IRS required
1099 for the year 2004 and tax and corporate information for the years 2004,
2005, and 2006 although the judgment wasn’t entered until May 2006.
Leonard Cohen evidently also advised IRS, when filing his coveted “theft loss,”
that he was not pursuing third party reimbursement. The default judgment,
payment from Westin, and lawsuit against Greenberg prove his statements
regarding this matter are also evidence of fraud.
58. On April 15, 2005, Kelley Lynch advised Agent Bill Betzer (whose name
is raised in Natural Wealth’s Complaint filed against Cohen/Kory in June 2005),
Internal Revenue Service, that she felt Leonard Cohen had committed tax
fraud. At first, Agent Betzer advised her to bring the fraud into the IRS with a
lawyer. He then advised her to contact the Fraud Unit. I contacted the Fraud
Unit; filed a Complaint online with IRS; and called the Internal Revenue Service
in Washington, DC because of the high-profile nature of this matter and the
tactics being used against her. I also contacted IRS Criminal Division. In the
summer of 2005, I began documenting everything I was going through in
- 42 -Exhibit HHHH: Schedule of Perjured Statements in Declarations
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
emails for IRS and provided them with an abundance of evidence supporting
the allegations that Leonard Cohen committed tax fraud.
59. Robert Kory was well aware that in 2005 I intended to report Cohen’s
tax fraud to Internal Revenue Service. In early March 2007, Agent Kelly Sopko
(of the United States Treasury) called me and asked if we could meet at my
residence in Santa Ana, California. Agent Sopko then flew into California from
Washington, DC and she, another Treasury Agent, and I met to discuss many
issues related to the allegations that Cohen committed criminal tax fraud, my
emails and evidence I provided IRS, and other matters. I didn’t have to report
Cohen’s tax fraud to the Treasury Department in 2007 because I reported it to
IRS, emailed and mailed them an abundance of evidence, and this is what led to
the meeting with Agent Sopko and her partner.
60. Shortly after this meeting, Agent Sopko sent me an email (that Kory
raised in his declaration) advising me to contact Agent Luis Tejeda, Internal
Revenue Service, provide him with specific details related to this matter and
evidence. I did indeed provide Cohen and Kory with a copy of Agent Sopko’s
email and, in response to that email, Kory evidently contacted Agent Tejeda and
arranged a meeting with, among others, Cohen’s CPA Mike Mesnick and
himself. According to Kory’s letter to Agent Tejeda, Agent Sopko’s email was a
game changer. I am not clear what any of this has to do with service of
Cohen’s Summons & Complaint but have advised this Court that I do not
believe LA Superior Court has jurisdiction over federal tax matters.
- 43 -Exhibit HHHH: Schedule of Perjured Statements in Declarations
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
62. Robert Kory’s declaration is evidence that, using Agent Sopko’s email,
he submitted fraudulent evidence to Agent Tejeda including, but not limited to,
the Complaint in this matter and the entirely fraudulent “expense ledger.” I
misappropriated nothing and Leonard Cohen has merely used this Complaint in
an attempt to explain away his wrong doing. I didn’t administer Traditional
Holdings, LLC. Cohen and his representatives did. There was nothing to
administer in any event. Greenberg, Cohen’s investor, managed the assets and
the annuity obligation didn’t arise until January 2011 at which point it had been
extinguished from the federal tax returns by Cohen’s personal corporate and
tax lawyer, Richard Westin. I had nothing whatsoever to do with tax matters
although Cohen and Westin appointed me Tax Matters partner on the federal
tax returns for Traditional Holdings, LLC as my accountant advised me in
September 2004.
63. On April 9, 2012, during my trial, I issued a subpoena to Agent Tejeda
as the IRS binder provided her Court appointed lawyers, mid trial although he
prosecutor evidently met with Kory two weeks prior to the beginning of the
trial, contained the first evidence she had seen with respect to Cohen’s
fraudulent refund. Judge Robert Vanderet wrongfully advised my lawyers, at a
Sidebar in that matter, that I was aware of these tax matters. I was not aware
of Cohen’s IRS refund and had no idea what anyone was talking about. I had
an absolute legal right to impeach Cohen and Kory’s testimony and the jury in
debriefing advised my lawyers that they wanted to hear from IRS. The IRS has
privacy concerns and does not provide third parties with privileged
- 44 -Exhibit HHHH: Schedule of Perjured Statements in Declarations
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
information. They also do not advise anyone what they are investigating or
intend to prosecute. It seems preposterous to assume that the IRS is not
interested in a matter that involves a failure to report millions in income. In
any event, I had no way of discovering this information. Judge Vanderet
decided that Agent Tejeda, who required IRS/DOJ approval prior to testifying,
decided not to wait to approximately two hours to hear whether or not he was
permitted to testify. I planned to ask Agent Tejeda several questions that she
viewed as legal impeachment testimony. My questions also related to the
testimony about illegal K-1s from LC Investments, LLC that Cohen transmitted
to the State of Kentucky and IRS for the years 2003, 2004, and 2005 indicating
that Lynch is a partner who received $0 income from this entity during those
periods. This tax information directly contradicts the fraudulent expense
ledger. The prosecutor advised the jurors that the IRS matter was a ruse. She
preferred the fraudulent narrative that concluded I was merely a disgruntled
ex-lover (which I was not), harassing Cohen for no legitimate reason, and
someone who evidently wanted to attend one of his concerts which is absurd. I
also wanted Agent Tejeda to explain why he believed she was included on the
2001, 2002, and 2003 federal tax returns with respect to Traditional Holdings,
LLC. I had hoped Agent Tejeda could explain why I have corporate books,
records, agreements, and stock certificates evidencing my ownership interest
in Traditional Holdings, LLC, Blue Mist Touring Company, Inc. and Old Ideas,
LLC and what it means when you willfully disregard all corporate records. I
also felt that Agent Tejeda was in a position to advise the jury that, contrary to
- 45 -Exhibit HHHH: Schedule of Perjured Statements in Declarations
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
witness testimony and the prosecutor’s false statements, my tax records with
IRS prove that I was not in receipt of IRS required form 1099 for the year 2004
from Leonard Cohen and was in need of additional corporate tax information
for the years 2004, 2005, and 2006. Finally, I felt Agent Tejeda was in a
position to explain what an actual corporate accounting is as opposed to the
meaningless list of numbers included on the fraudulent expense ledger. There
was nothing private for Agent Tejeda to address since most of the information
is contained in documents provided to IRS which involve me, my tax accounts
with IRS, and were submitted as evidence via the IRS Binder. During
debriefing, my lawyers were advised that the jurors wanted to hear from the
IRS. The jurors evidently believed they were involved in a federal tax matter.
And, at least one juror, relied on the prosecutor’s false statements that the
assets of Traditional Holdings, LLC totaled only $150,000 when Cohen’s loans
and expenditures total approximately $6.7 million and are indeed corporate
assets that he is required to repay with 6% interest. That interest now totals
approximately $4 million bringing the amount Cohen owes Traditional
Holdings, LLC to somewhere in the vicinity of $10 million. In any event, I have
no idea what Kory, Mesnick, and others, discussed with Agent Tejeda. I will
however hand deliver a copy of this entire motion, with all exhibits, to Agent
Tejeda immediately after filing it with LA Superior Court.
64. Given the fact that Robert Kory does not work for or speak on behalf
of the Internal Revenue Service, or Agent Tejeda, his statements with respect
to the IRS are hearsay and self-serving. The IRS does not make information
- 46 -Exhibit HHHH: Schedule of Perjured Statements in Declarations
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
about investigations, or potential prosecutions, public knowledge. Neither does
the State of Kentucky. Their Fraud Unit confirmed that for but did advise me to
feel free to provide them with additional information.
65. I do not believe I am required to “persuade” IRS that Cohen was
engaged in tax fraud. On April 15, 2005, and thereafter, I advised IRS of the
allegations that Cohen committed criminal tax fraud. I provided IRS with an
abundance of evidence supporting those allegations. After meeting with the
Treasury agents, I spoke to my former account, Dale Burgess, who asked me to
advise IRS/Treasury that he was present when Kory offered me 50% community
and my lawyers understood that Cohen’s tax fraud was criminal. Traditional
Holdings, LLC provided Leonard Cohen with a 1099 in the amount of $8
million. This amount evidences the full value of the Sony deal and the
corporate assets Cohen wasted. The 1099 Kory attached to his declaration was
in the amount of $8 million – not $7 million. Perhaps Kory is attempting to
exclude the $1 million prepayment Leonard Cohen personally received in 1999
that was never transferred to Traditional Holdings, LLC or Blue Mist Touring
Company, Inc., the owner of the assets. It is irrelevant what Kory advised IRS.
He is not the IRS and has merely addressed his defense of his client, Leonard
Cohen. Kory now serves as a paid witness which is really unconscionable. The
Internal Revenue Service is the only party in a position to explain whether or
not they view the Traditional Holdings, LLC 1099 as legitimate or not. Kory
also advised the IRS that the Traditional Holdings, LLC violated the 2008
- 47 -Exhibit HHHH: Schedule of Perjured Statements in Declarations
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Boulder, Colorado restraining order. It is impossible to imagine how a local
order subverts IRS reporting requirements.
66. As of this date, I have no evidence proving that any tax return, related
to any corporate entity that I have a legitimate ownership interest in, was
amended or which would support Leonard Cohen’s testimony that his tax
lawyer, Richard Westin, rectified Lynch’s ownership interest in Traditional
Holdings, LLC. In fact, the State of Kentucky has recently advised Lynch me
that my name is still connected with Traditional Holdings, LLC I must file
returns, and bring the entity current, in order to remove my name. The
corporate formation documents were not amended. Robert Kory appears to be
defending Leonard Cohen’s federal and state tax matters and none of this
information is relevant to my position that I was not served the summons and
complaint in this matter.
67. According to my attorneys, who Kory testified during my 2012 trial
were experts in tax analysis, Leonard Cohen’s tax fraud is both civil and
criminal. As of the fall of 2004, the penalties and interest, with respect to
Traditional Holdings, LLC, alone totaled in excess of $10 million. I was advised
that similar penalties and interest applied to other Cohen related entities. This
might explain the lengths Cohen and his lawyers have gone to target, destroy,
and discredit me and the utterly abusive litigation tactics they have employed.
68. Robert Kory signed this declaration, under penalty of perjury, on
January 4, 2014.
EXHIBITPERJURED STATEMENTS AND
- 48 -Exhibit HHHH: Schedule of Perjured Statements in Declarations
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
FRAUDULENT MISREPRESENTATIONSIN THE
DECLARATION OF KEVIN PRINS(ATTACHED TO KORY DECLARATION – EXHIBIT A)
69. This entire document is fraudulent. I have addressed these matters in my
declaration and have a legal ownership interest in Blue Mist Touring Company,
Inc., Old Ideas, LLC, and Traditional Holdings, LLC. Corporate distributions
were not addressed on the “expense ledger” and that would include with
respect to my promissory note. Phantom income shifted to me but not
distributed is not included. And, income I received partnership K-1 documents
with respect to Traditional Holdings, LLC (and paid taxes on) is not included on
this schedule. Many of these items are included as “misappropriations.”
70. Leonard Cohen was not in a position to tell me how I should receive
payments. Stranger Management was a d/b/a and Kelley Lynch received
income for her share of intellectual property as did Stranger Management.
Furthermore, my ownership interest in intellectual property is held in my
personal name.
71. Kevin Prins signed this declaration, under the penalty of perjury, on
January 24, 2006. Robert Kory attached it to his declaration submitted to this
Court in connection with Plaintiffs’ Opposition to my Motion to Vacate.
DECLARATION OF SCOTT EDELMAN
Exhibit A: Proof of service – Cohen’s summons & complaint.
Exhibit B: Kelley Lynch email to Edelman dated August 24, 2005 at 4:18 PM.
Exhibit C: Kelley Lynch email to Edelman dated September 3, 2005.
- 49 -Exhibit HHHH: Schedule of Perjured Statements in Declarations
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Exhibit D: NY Times article – Leonard Cohen’s Troubles May Be A Theme Come True – October 6, 2005.
Exhibit E: Proof of Service – Summons filed in related Case No. BC 344120.
Exhibit F: KL email to Ken/Gibson Dunn dated October 5, 2005.
Exhibit G: California Restraining Order dated November 3, 2005.
Exhibit H: Notice of Related Case No. BC 341120.
Exhibit J: Request for Entry of Default dated December 5, 2005.
Exhibit K: Email from Arian Sims (Gibson, Dunn) to Kelley Lynch dated January 19, 2006 re. “Ex Parte Application.”
Exhibit L: Lynch email to Ariane Sims (Gibson, Dunn) dated January 19, 2006.
Exhibit M: Proof of Service of Request for Dismissal filed in Case No. BC 338322.
Exhibit N: Email from Gibson Dunn to Lynch dated January 24, 2006 re. “courtesy” copies of documents filed in support of Cohen’s entry of default.
Exhibit O: Irma Guerra email to Lynch dated April 27, 2006 and Lynch email response to Guerra dated April 27, 2006.
Exhibit P: Declarations of Service for the Notice of Order re. Default Judgment and the Judgment.
72. Regardless of what Scott Edelman’s declaration alleges, most of which is
hearsay, I was not served the Summons & Complaint with respect to Cohen’s
Complaint filed on August 15, 2005 in Case No. BC 338322.
72. My declaration, and those of other individuals who submitted
declarations, in this matter addresses the fact that I was not served the
Summons & Complaint and explains why the proof of service is evidence of
- 50 -Exhibit HHHH: Schedule of Perjured Statements in Declarations
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
fraud. I repeatedly attempted to address the fact that I was not served, with
Edelman and Kory, and they repeatedly advised me (among other things) that
they would be happy to speak to my lawyer and hung up on me. This was
during the actual litigation proceedings in this case.
73. Due to the ongoing criminal harassment of everyone who has provided
me with a declaration, I refuse to provide this Court with a declaration from
Chad Knaak. I have advised IRS, FBI, DOJ, and others, that they personally
should speak with Chad Knaak about the hearsay statements made in Scott
Edelman’s declaration. Rutger Penick, Paulette Brandt, and I were present
when I asked Chad Knaak to phone Scott Edelman and advise him that I was
NOT SERVED and if he attempted to serve me that I would hold Gibson, Dunn
accountable for mental duress. I have no idea if Edelman’s assistant is the
individual Chad Knaak spoke with. Edelman’s declaration with respect to this
matter should be disregarded as he is not his assistant and these statements
are hearsay. I did indeed advise Chad, although I wasn’t “yelling” that he
should inform Edelman that I viewed this lawsuit as an attempt to cover up
criminal tax fraud and obstruct justice. I have also addressed the fact that the
LA Times brought this lawsuit to my attention on August 16, 2005. Scott
Edelman’s name appeared in news accounts as early as August 16, 2005 and
everyone will be held personally accountable for their own actions in
accordance with the laws of karma.
74. Based on the other Gibson, Dunn emails I found online, I was able to
determine the format they use for their email addresses which is not that
- 51 -Exhibit HHHH: Schedule of Perjured Statements in Declarations
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
complex: first initial and surname @gibsondunn.com. The custody matter of
my son, Ray Charles Lindsey, was coordinated by Steve Lindsey, Leonard
Cohen, Robert Kory, and Betsy Superfon. I did think IRS Commissioner Mark
Everson should attend the Case Management Conference and I most certainly
was not in a position to do so because I was not served the lawsuit and did not
read the actual allegations until the Complaint was posted online in or around
April 2010.
75. As of December 28, 2005, I was evicted from my home on Mandeville
Canyon Road. Leonard Cohen, Scott Edelman, and other Cohen
representatives were aware of this fact and know that I ended up homeless.
Cohen provided a declaration to the Boulder Court confirming that he
monitored my activity and whereabouts and understood that I checked my
emails at the Apple Store in Santa Monica during this period. I was not
however in a position to open, download, print, or read any attachments.
Evidently people who live in rarefied air have no idea how difficult being
homeless is. Scott Edelman understood that he could legally and formally ask
me to accept service of legal documents via email. He did not and no such
agreement exists. This email account has not existed for years.
76. Scott Edelman submitted this declaration to the Court on January 4,
2014.
77. My declaration, those of others, and all evidence and exhibits attached to
the Motion for Terminating Sanctions more specifically addresses the perjured
- 52 -Exhibit HHHH: Schedule of Perjured Statements in Declarations
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
and fraudulent misrepresentations in the declarations submitted with Plaintiffs’
Opposition.
78. Paragraph 21 of Michelle Rice’s declaration is quite telling. She
understood I resided in Colorado but appeared to request a California address.
Michelle Rice, who doesn’t know me and did not represent me, then provided
my alleged information to the District Court in Colorado advising them where
to send notices, etc. That would include to an email account that was targeted
and taken down. Michelle Rice did not provide the Court with my Colorado
address but provided them with Phil Spector’s. In any event, Phil Spector no
longer used that address for his mail. Michelle Rice and Robert Kory contacted
my employers in Boulder, Colorado and they understood where I resided but
Rice decided to provide the District Court of Colorado with Phil Spector’s
address in California without my authorization or permission. I find that
unconscionable and evidence of the ongoing tactics and litigation abuses. Rice
has no idea what I was or was not notified of because the woman doesn’t know
me or represent me.
79. On April 15, 2005, I reported allegations that Leonard Cohen committed
criminal tax fraud. Leonard Cohen and Robert Kory understood this and, after
months of attempting to coerce me into a deal, retaliated with this lawsuit.
This lawsuit is blatant retaliation; an attempt to obfuscate issues; and a willful
and knowing attempt to obstruct justice and cover up criminal tax fraud. Not
serving me just further Plaintiffs’ nefarious goals and objectives. Leonard
- 53 -Exhibit HHHH: Schedule of Perjured Statements in Declarations
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Cohen cannot even be bothered to attend hearings. He just sends a team of
lawyers who also serve as paid witnesses.
I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that
the foregoing is true and correct.
Dated: 17 March 2015
_____________________________________Kelley Lynch, In Propria Persona
- 54 -Exhibit HHHH: Schedule of Perjured Statements in Declarations