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 <kelley.lynch.2010@gmail.com>

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