March 7, 2017 at 1.39 PM

From: Sandra <sandra123@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, Mar 7, 2017 at 1:39 PM
Subject: Blog post
To: kelley.lynch.2016@gmail.com



It will be facinating to me to see if you can meet your burden under the Local Rules of the Los Angeles Superior Court to demonstrate the need for a licensed private investigator in a 16-count case wherein the issues are limited to did you send the communications and if so what was your intent in doing so.

I have a feeling that your views of the legitimate need for and scope of private investigation services and the views of the judge who passes on your request may differ.

Certainly, the court is not going to fund a wide ranging investigation of the victims and/or your conspiracy and/or "fraud' theories, since none of that would be a defense to the crimes with which you are charged.

I highly doubt an attorney told you that 1001 evidence consisting of your prior harassing communications would be probative of "fraud". None of these communucations by you would be admissible for the truth of the matter asserted, just the pattern of harassing behavor proving "intent to annoy" under Evidence Code section 1101.


The admissibility analysis is eactly how I laid it out, e.g. are the prior acts probative on the issue of identity, motive or intent, and does that probative value outweigh any prejudicial impact.

Commentary:  The court has appointed an investigator.  

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