Skip to main content
Skip to content
Case File
efta-02623740DOJ Data Set 11Other

EFTA02623740

Date
Unknown
Source
DOJ Data Set 11
Reference
efta-02623740
Pages
2
Persons
0
Integrity

Summary

Ask AI About This Document

0Share
PostReddit

Extracted Text (OCR)

EFTA Disclosure
Text extracted via OCR from the original document. May contain errors from the scanning process.
From: Lawrence Krauss < Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2018 7:22 PM To: jeffrey E.; nancy dahl Cc: Lawrence Krauss Subject: Fwd: Response to your inquiry FYI..= Jeffrey, we can talk tomorrow by phone.. re other new =nformation. Kind of amazed that the fact that the organizer of the =onference indicated the flight had nothing to do with the conference =ad no impact on the cretin who is provost. LMK Begin forwarded message: From: =/b>Mark Searle Subject: =/b>Response to your =nquiry Date: =/b>September 12, 2018 at 12:30:03 =M CDT To: =/b>Lawrence Krauss < Lawrence, Yes, the other party in the dismissal action is the dean who, =y policy, is the academic administrator responsible for making the =ecommendation of dismissal. My September 4, 2018 email addressed =our procedural question about whether the OEI investigation would be =e-opened. That explanation stands. My September 7, 2017 =mail to you does not contradict this position. That communication =as based upon OEI's verbal report to me that the available =nformation about the allegation was limited to Dr. Thomson's =ccusation and your denial. Without more, there was insufficient =vidence to substantiate a policy violation. You were, thus =feared. My comment about "additional complaints" =egarding the Australia Skeptics Convention, contemplated the likelihood =hat (a) Dr. Thomson would dispute the outcome of the initial review =nd/or (b) other individuals without direct knowledge might write to the =niversity echoing Dr. Thomson's allegation. When a =ituation occurs that involves an ASU faculty member or student, it is =ot an uncommon occurrence for the University to have individuals, from =ithin as well as outside of the university community, contact us and =emand a matter be investigated. Those type of =ommunications differ from situations where individuals with direct =nowledge of an incident become witnesses in an inquiry and the =nvestigator is able to gather additional factual information that goes =o the question of whether certain conduct occurred and, if so, whether =he conduct violates institutional policy. As I indicated, the arguments you raise =n your August 29 and August 30th emails can certainly be =ade by you in the dismissal process which is the institutional process =ow underway. Having read those communications, I do not see that =hey raise new evidence that impacts my determinations. I never =elied on the photograph submitted by Dr. Thomson as proving the =nderlying allegation that you touched the unnamed woman's =reast. While the =odcast from Dr. Thomson occurred after she received her copy of my =etermination, her dislike and animus towards you was apparent to the =El investigators and was already factored in to their =indings. EFTA_R1_01833430 EFTA02623740 OEI was aware =f Dr. Thomson's April 2017 podcast during the course of its =nvestigation and you had the opportunity to share your concerns with =he OEI investigator about Dr. Thomson's statements, including =hat you felt that they were defamatory. In my =etermination, I rejected OEI's conclusion in the allegation =ver the "photobombing" incident. That incident is =ot included in the dean's recommendation of dismissal. During the =ourse of the investigation, you had the opportunity to provide =nformation to the OEI investigator about other individuals at the =onvention who you wished to have the investigator contact. You =id not identify the writer of the email you attached to the August =9thcommunication. With respect to your =ugust 30, 2018 email, your argument does not lead me to change my =etermination. The travel expense report lists the purpose of the =rip as: "Speaking at a series of scientific events in aus"=— OEI made a typographical error in referencing "ASU =9D in that statement. The Australia Skeptics Convention was in =ustralia. You chose to submit a request for reimbursement. =ou chose to seek reimbursement for daily allowance ($155/day) for =ovember 25, 26 and 27, 2016 which are the days of the Convention. =ou choose to seek reimbursement of the cost of your Qantas airfare from =anberra, Australia to Melbourne, Australia on November 25, 2016 which =s the flight that brought you to the Australia Skeptics =onvention. My determination that ASU paid a portion of your =ravel expenses for you to attend the Convention is supported by =niversity business records and that conclusion does not need to be =evisited. President Crow forwarded your September 5th email to me where you =equest that your emails from August 29 and 30th be =ploaded to Blackboard for members of the Conciliation Committee. =his confirms that I will request Elizabeth King in my office to upload =hose documents, together with this response to them. Mark=S. Searle, Ph.D. Executive Vice President & University =rovost and Professor, School of =ommunity Resources & Development Arizona State University Fulton Center, Suite 420 Tempe, AZ Lawrence M. =rauss Director, The Origins Project at ASU Co-Director, Cosmology Initiative Foundation Professor School of Earth & Space Exploration and Physics =epartment Arizona State University, P.O. Box =71404, Tempe, AZ 85287-140 origins.asu.edu I krauss.faculty.asu.edu 2 EFTA_R1_01833431 EFTA02623741

Technical Artifacts (5)

View in Artifacts Browser

Email addresses, URLs, phone numbers, and other technical indicators extracted from this document.

Domainkrauss.faculty.asu.edu
Domainorigins.asu.edu
Phone2623740
Phone2623741
Wire Refreferencing

Forum Discussions

This document was digitized, indexed, and cross-referenced with 1,400+ persons in the Epstein files. 100% free, ad-free, and independent.

Annotations powered by Hypothesis. Select any text on this page to annotate or highlight it.