Further Evidence that Gianelli Continued to Criminally Harass Me Over My Motion to Vacate Cohen's Lawsuit

From: Kelley Lynch <kelley.lynch.2010@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, Aug 16, 2013 at 11:03 AM
Subject: Re:
To: "*irs. commissioner" <*IRS.Commissioner@irs.gov>, Washington Field <washington.field@ic.fbi.gov>, ASKDOJ <ASKDOJ@usdoj.gov>, "Kelly.Sopko" <Kelly.Sopko@tigta.treas.gov>, "Doug.Davis" <Doug.Davis@ftb.ca.gov>, Dennis <Dennis@riordan-horgan.com>, OIGCOMPL OIGCOMPL <oigcompl@lapd.lacity.org>, MEDIA RELATIONS PIO <pio@lapd.lacity.org>, chaleffg <chaleffg@lapd.lacity.org>, Vivienne Swanigan <vivienne.swanigan@lacity.org>, sedelman <sedelman@gibsondunn.com>, JFeuer@gibsondunn.com, info <info@kibi-edu.org>, "YesheRimpoche@aol.com" <bhakhatulku@yahoo.com>

Hello Sharmapa,

Who  knows - perhaps corrupt LA Superior Court and their rotten logicians will hang themselves nude from a cross for a fraud celebrity with motive.

Love,
Kelley

On Fri, Aug 16, 2013 at 11:02 AM, Kelley Lynch <kelley.lynch.2010@gmail.com> wrote:

To the IRS,

You should absolutely audit LA County over this insanity.  They have just wasted another 1/2 billion dollars on yet another failed program.  Well California did - payroll contractor.  They wasted 1 billion on their failed LA Superior Court program.  What is LA County spending to help sabotage the IRS?  I think the taxpayers should know.  They are furious about Cohen's criminal tax fraud.  How much has LA Superior Court, the DA, City Attorney, law enforcement, etc. spent on this?  That should be enlightening.  The DA's office - according to Cooley - doesn't keep track of things like how much they spent on the Phil Spector murder trial.  In any event, let'[s see what LA Superior Court does now.  They have destroyed my life, destroyed my sons' lives, aided and abetted theft, helped set me up and wrongfully imprison me.  I wonder what they'll do for an encore?  I tend to doubt they'll hang themselves nude on a cross but who knows.  Give them time.

His Holiness Kusum Lingpa viewed these judges as maniacs for a very good reason.  As he said, I cannot help you with the law, whatever that is.  An entirely relative concept.  But, I can help with reality. 

All the best,
Kelley

On Fri, Aug 16, 2013 at 10:56 AM, Kelley Lynch <kelley.lynch.2010@gmail.com> wrote:

To the IRS and FBI,

Here's my opinion.  People belong in prison re. the default judgment.  Freeman didn't require proof of corporate ownership or the trust?  Fascinating, no?  The judgment is void.  It is evidence of theft.  It wrongfully altered my FEDERAL TAX RETURNS.  I await a formal IRS opinion prior to filing my lawsuit against Los Angeles.  I do hope Phil Spector joins me.  I think he had a right to confront Cohen.  Could care less about Cutler.  He should marry Streeter, the sycophant.  No one I know is impressed.

All the best,
Kelley

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: STEPHEN R. GIANELLI <stephengianelli@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, Aug 16, 2013 at 9:37 AM
Subject:
To: blind <distribution@gmail.com>

Here is my take on Kelley’s motion to vacate the May 2006 $7.9M embezzlement based default J.

Her entire legal argument is underpinned by County of San Diego v. Gorham (2010) 186 Cal.App.4th 1215 – the case wherein there was no disputing that the proof of personal service underpinning the judgment was intentionally falsified, because Mr. Gorham – the moving party – was incarcerated at the time of “service” at another location.

Gorham made it explicit that "Because of the strong public policy in favor of the finality of judgments, equitable relief from a default judgment or order is available only in exceptional circumstances."  (Id. at pp. 1229-1230, italics added.)   In Gorham, the exceptional circumstances involved a process server who committed "perjury" in his declaration of service.  He falsely claimed he served Gorham at one address at a time when "Gorham was in custody in jail."  (Id. at p. 1231.)  The court said this "constitutes evidence of an intentional false act that was used to obtain fundamental jurisdiction over Gorham."  (Id. at p. 1232, italics added.)”

The incontrovertible evidence in Gorham that the proof of service was intentionally falsified is a far cry from the showing made by Kelley’s moving declarations, which in any event materially conflict on whether nonfamily members resided in the home where service occurred. (See (La Jolla Casa De Manana v. Hopkins (1950) 98 Cal.App.2d 339, 345-346 ["[A] trial judge has an inherent right to disregard the testimony of any witness . . . when he [or she] is satisfied that the witness is not telling the truth . . . ."] and (In re Marriage of Hofer (2012) 208 Cal.App.4th 454, 460 [That is the case even where appellant's declaration is uncontradicted.].)

Moreover, by asserting a nonstatutory, equitable basis to move to set aside the judgment, Kelley is subject to the rule articulated in In re Marriage of Park (1980) 27 Cal.3d 337, 345 [ "A motion to vacate a judgment should not be granted where it is shown that the party requesting equitable relief has been guilty of inexcusable neglect or that laches should attach”]. See Gibble v. Car-Lene Research, Inc. (1998) 67 Cal.App.4th 295, 314 [“Where "'a motion to vacate a default judgment is made' beyond the statutory deadline for relief, it is "'directed to the court's inherent equity power.'"].

As stated in Gibble:

“But a party seeking equitable relief "must satisfy three elements:  'First, the defaulted party must demonstrate that [he or she] has a meritorious case.  Secondly, the party . . . must articulate a satisfactory excuse for not presenting a defense to the original action.  Lastly, the moving party must demonstrate diligence in seeking to set aside the default once . . . discovered.'"  (Gibble v. Car-Lene Research, Inc., supra, 67 Cal.App.4th at p. 315, italics added.)

Assuming the first is somehow established by the 83 pages of unverified narrative appended to Kelley’s declaration, the moving declarations do not even attempt to establish the later two elements, thereby removing any discretion the court might have otherwise had to grant the motion.

I give it zero chance of success.