February 10, 2017 at 11.40 AM

From: Paulette Brandt <paulettebrandt8@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, Feb 10, 2017 at 11:40 AM
Subject: Fwd:
To: Kelley Lynch <kelley.lynch.2013@gmail.com>


---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Sandra <sandra123@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, Feb 10, 2017 at 9:14 AM
Subject:
To: paulettebrandt8@gmail.com

How many more times does the food stamp queen need to be incarcerated in the Los Angeles County jail before she gets the message that she has no lawful reason to contact any of the people she currently harasses?

Are you really that stupid that you cannot see that truth? Why then do you encourage her to get herself in trouble time after time?

This is not exactly rocket science.

You do know that Phil Spector's last chance petition was denied by the Supreme Court, with no more appeals available, and that with his failing health, he will likely die in prison? Meaning that your play using Kelley Lynch to get back on the Spector dole is over.

Not that it had any chance to begin with. Kelley Lynch has been on the list of letters that Spector has instructed the prison authorities to toss in the trash unread since day-one. Nor are any of her or your emails to Dennis Riordan getting read either.


What a pair of losers.

Commentary:  This particular email was sent to Paulette Brandt.  Ms. Brandt worked as Phil Spector's personal assistant for many years from the late 70s through 2002.  She was also Phil Spector's girlfriend.  In fact, from approximately 1991 through 2002, Ms. Brandt was Mr. Spector's personal assistant and actually worked inside his Pasadena home.  She knows many of the witnesses who testified against Phil Spector during his trial.  It is important to note that Stephen Gianelli routinely inserts Phil Spector into his harassing emails.  He also attempts to infiltrate matters such as a Tax Court case that involved the IRS Chief Trial Counsel Office in Los Angeles.  At that time, Gianelli attempted to insert the Phil Spector case, former DA Steve Cooley, and other immaterial issues into Lynch's Petition asking the Court to permit her to file a motion related to fraud upon the Tax Court.  The Court ultimately determined, based upon the IRS original determination letter sent to Leonard Cohen in 2002, that it did not have jurisdiction over her.  That is disturbing as the matter related to a $1 million non-refundable prepayment against the 2002 Traditional Holdings, LLC transaction although the downpayment was paid to Leonard Cohen personally.  This email is actually an attempt to elicit information about Phil Spector, Lynch's and/or Brandt's communications with Spector, and their communications with Dennis Riordan and other Spector attorneys.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

From:  Sandra  <sandra123@gmail.com> Date: Wed, Feb 22, 2017 at 8:19 PM Subject:  To: kelley.lynch.2016@gmail.com As you stand before the court in the morning in a serious criminal case that - if you are convicted - could result in a 9-year jail sentence (which would translate to an actual 4 and a half years behind bars) - keep in mind that the sole reason that you are in that position is not some conspiracy, it is not a result of the conduct of others, your situation is entirely the result of your continual refusal to obey a facially valid order of the court, your prior criminal record of convictions and probation violations, and your 14 year history of electronic harrassment. Commentary:  The reasons Lynch is in this position is due to the fact that she reported allegations that Cohen committed criminal tax fraud, he and his representatives retaliated, and the DA dragged her into the Phil Spector case.  The fraud California domestic violen...
Read more

March 8, 2017 at 10.00 PM

From:  Sandra  <sandra123@gmail.com> Date: Wed, Mar 8, 2017 at 10:00 PM Subject: Blog post of today To: kelley.lynch.2016@gmail.com I find it extremely ironic that you are all lathered up about a strightfoward website maining consisting of an archive of pleadings in your various legal matters with Leonard Cohen, with three FAQ;s that consist of stright foward anwers to your primary legal contentions that aree not onlysupported by the evidence but have also been so found by the court. This is ironic due to your many wibsites and tens of thousands of blog posts over the last seven years that consist mainly of your warped, self-serving, and factually and legally unsupported hyperbole about these matters. At a minumum there should be a dispassionate rebuttle to your daily diatribes based on facts and actual court documents and judicial rulings. Commentary:  Lynch is not lathered up about the Fact Check blog that is Leonard Cohen's defense to crimi...
Read more

March 2, 2017 at 7.19 AM

From:  Sandra  <sandra123@gmail.com> Date: Thu, Mar 2, 2017 at 7:19 AM Subject: Blog posted, harassing emails To: kelley.lynch.2016@gmail.com I am sure that the emails you are posting on your blog are just the tip of the iceberg, and that in actuality you are sending out far more emails to the City Attorney and his deputies. Have you read Penal code section 653M, or do you simply believe that everything you write is so important and legitimate that you have an unqualified right to say it, to whomever you wish, as many times as your whims dictate? Don't be suprized if you pick up additional charges (if Bruce Cutler alone decides to request charges, that would be hundreds of additional counts) or wind up remanded. You just cannot keep scoffing at court orders and the Penal Code while taunting prosecutors without consequences. Commentary:  Lynch continues to document everything that unfolds for IRS, FBI, DOJ, and other authorities.  Lync...
Read more