Skip to main content
Skip to content
Case File
efta-02625003DOJ Data Set 11Other

EFTA02625003

Date
Unknown
Source
DOJ Data Set 11
Reference
efta-02625003
Pages
5
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: jeffrey E. <[email protected]> Sent: Sunday, September 2, 2018 11:19 PM To: Lawrence Krauss Subject: Re: hi.. hope all is well lets see justins billi on tues. then you will =eed prep for conciliation . and discipline !III 4o=A0 1. you should ask questions =C* not give answers. ex. how do you=come to the conclusion that ASU has jurisdiciton .? can you define f=r me sexual harrassment . can you point to t=e regs. . the drawing. ? silly, =C* has any student complained prior to buzz feed articel. h=s any faculty .... has any ... =C* ask questions . as much as you can. Ii>=A0 why did they choose to believe. . as you =now the title 9 rules are being modified. I assume we will ope=ate under the proposed regs. as you are on notice. of the changes. ??.=,A0 if they say no, you might suggest , waiting until the= are finalized as after a hearing you will fly a court action. that =ill by definition. have the new rules in place by that time. =C* You would like to work out a solution. =you woudl like to work out a solution. . over and over. =C* \ you need to appear reasonable. if yo= argue, you were awkward. . accidnet after accindent ski=t breast comments it appears weak.. you CANNOT attack the peo=el that complained you need to attack their testimony. =C* I dont want to atttack the women, I would like you to make you= own decision based on the facts. . etc. . the fac=s the rules and the law. . if you appear misleading4k=A0 , one time its over. !! you w=re not believeed the first time. you were too defensiive.,=A0 . you made statmeents that were silly, ie no p=oblem with case as i was invited back ?!! . =ant say that again. lucy hawkins was the daughter of my friend= I will happily have a face to face with the supervisor that f=led the report. she never filed it when she heard it.40=A0 is that a failure to report issue. lucy w=nts no part of this.. to suggest she told someone that never =iid anyting , but when asked recallled a story she onve heard. ?O=A0 does that seem fair. quesiton quesi=on. . dont say ITS NOT FAIR !! I understand =he concern. I understand how some things can be misinterpreted but I=ask you if and if so how does these events fit into the rules . law.=and regs. can you explain it to me. On Sun, Sep 2, 2018 at 6:11 PM, L=wrence Krauss < <mailto » wrote: =he is a journalist in Australia who was also on our Amazon cruise.. she wa= involved in a defamation suit in OZ, and if my memory is correct, she eit=er launched the suit, or a countersuit, and fought it through to the end a=d won some money. She is also a strong supporter and has become a f=iend of ours. twitter.comilkraussl<=a> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http- =A_twitter.com_Ikraussl&d=DQMFAg&c=AGbYxf.lbXK67KfXyGqyv2Ejiz41=qQuZFk4A- 1IxfAU&r=DB9LvLOIQiaqWcFOihHC0LZCntZCR8Xtq5BHKNWISTo&m=3DciP97mEbO4349G8_Nf9ISUp33Th7MWHYf6uw7 yUBPZc&s=mspp0SBZaPjpSBOPRbD2=XlzHCi4LgzTZ8KNgjNB8Kg&e=> I www.lawrencemkrauss.com chttp://twitte..comilkraussl> <1=> EFTA_R1_01836051 EFTA02625003 On Sep 2, 2018, at 2:31 PM, jeffrey=E. <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]» wrote: who is she?? On Sun, Sep 2, 2018 at 4:4= PM, Lawrence Krauss < <mailto:[email protected]=» wrote: here are the arguments against and for a suit, sent a few weeks ago =y Alison with experience, from OZ.. =span class="m_-8984912549442869696m_5209989831675157983Apple-style- span"=style="border-collapse:separate;font-family:Helvetica;font-style:normal;=ont-variant-ligatures:normal;font- variant-caps:normal;font-variant-east-as=an:normal;font-weight:normal;letter-spacing:normal;line- height:normal;text=indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px;border-=pacing:0px"> Lawrence M. Krauss =rofessor School of Earth & Space Exploration and Physics =epartment Arizona State University, P.O. Box 871404, Tempe, A= 85287-1404 Research Office: Assistant (Jessica): <mailto <=iv style="font-style:normal;font-variant-caps:normal;font-weight:normal;=etter- spacing:normal;text-align:starttext-indent:0px;text-transform:none;=hite-space:normal;word-spacing:0px;margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;font-size:12pt;=ont-family:Calibri"> I twitter.com/Ikraussl <https://urldefe=se.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http- 3A twitter.com_lkrauss1&d=DQMFAg&=mp;c=AGbYxfJbXK67KfXyGqyv2Ejiz41FqQuZFk4A- 1IxfAU&r=DB9LvLOIQiaqWcF=ihHC0LZCntZCR8Xtq5BHKNVR5To&m=ciP97mEbO4349G8_Nf9l5Up33Th7MWH'a6uw7y=B P2c&s=mspp0SBZaPjp5BOPRbD2xXlzHCi4LgzTZ8KNgjNBBKg&e=> I w=w.lawrencemkrauss.com chttp://www.lawrencemkrauss.comk =C240 </=pan> Begin forwarded message: From: Alison B Subject: <=>Re: hi.. hope all is well =b>Date: August 17, 2018 at 11:55:55 PM PDT <=div> To: Lawrence Krauss mailto > > Hello there, i am sorry to hear that= Lawrence. Sorry if my reply is a bit late as i have been out of internet =ange as i am in Tonga. 2 EFTA_R1_01836052 EFTA02625004 That is terrible that ASU sent t=e report to Mel Thomson and horrible that she distributed it. Don'= these people have any serious battles to fight? There are so many huge pr=blems in the world and they are attacking a great person for what? Trivia.=lt is trivial. Vis a vis defamation, be a b=t wary and have a think about the action is the tight course of action for=you, and consult your misses who is extremely wise, also. </=iv> On the one hand if you can prove this woman lied, you may win a de=amation case against her. On the other hand, if y=u start that fight it could drag on for 2 or 3 years and thus keep appeari=g in the news. Worse she could make extravagant claims and make demands in=the Discovery process which would then get wide and repeated coverage. Sometimes defamation cases can make everything worse,=especially if she is able to make it appear as though you are persecuting =er, and she is weak and defenceless crusading for principles and you are s=rong and powerful. That would make it all worse.<=div> On the other hand if you can prove she is a malici=us actor who really had it in for you and can successfully win the PR war =s well as the legal battle then it may be worth it. Ideally you would join the publications that printed her claims to the s=it. They should be your primary target as it is their job not to destroy l=ves with unsubstantiated claims. That also deters other publishers from ha=ing a go at you if they see you are likely to litigate and to win. ASU determining against you complicates matters as people=can print what they have determined in their report. However they are not = court. Are you able to take legal action against ASU in a court? You need to appeal that decision and preferably take legal=action against ASU. I am not sure how or under what legislation that could=fall. But i think that universities must be bound by some sort of laws not=to unfairly dismiss or find against staff because their internal processes=are not courts. If laws are broken we have courts to deal with them. This =s extra-judicial. So if they violate your own rights with their non-court =etermination i would think there should be some form of legal redress, but=you would need a US lawyer for that one. I think =ou need to attack this issue at the root I would =ay nothing publicly until you have all your ducks in a row. =/div> I would first appeal the ASU verdict and hit that with everythin=. That uncomplicates everything and allows you a free swing at everything =Ise. Because these things take time, i would ask =he good defamation lawyer in Australia (just pay the money and get the bes= advice) about whether you can file against the publishing houses that pub=ished the false claims by wand then just add her on to the suit (but do=t make it about her) With the point about it bein= someone you had met before and not a stranger in the selfie, i would not =ely on this point as it is not really relevant to the case and she can jus= say "i was mistaken it wasnt a malicious lie" and then sh= is off the hook on that point. Just stick to the actual best points, numb=r 5 sounds promising. 3 EFTA_R1_01836053 EFTA02625005 I think you really need to =ake an appointment with the lawyer that briefs Stuart littlemore. Also weigh up the risk that if you sue, it will be news an= that means others may be emboldened to come forward with claims of their =wn. But ask Stuart Littlemore's briefing =awyer about your best course of legal action and what the pros and cons ar=. It is complicated and there are lots of parts t= weigh up. I am so sorry this is an awful thing to happen to a lovely pers=n who is great fun and really kind hearted. Make =n appoint,ent, dont delay, talk to the good lawyer And really good luck i am on your side. =C24> please note The information contained in this co=munication is confidential, may be attorney-client privileged, may c=nstitute inside information, and is intended only for the use of the ad=ressee. It is the property of JEE Unauthorized use, disclosure or co=ying of this communication or any part thereof is strictly prohibitedand may be unlawful. If you have received this communication in error,=please notify us immediately by return e-mail or by e-mail to [email protected]/=>, and destroy this communication and all copies thereof, including =11 attachments. copyright -all rights reserved plea=e note The information contained in this communication is confi=ential, may be attorney-client privileged, may constitute inside inform=tion, and is intended only for 4 EFTA_R1_01836054 EFTA02625006 the use of the addressee. It is the prop=rty of JEE Unauthorized use, disclosure or copying of this commun=cation or any part thereof is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. =f you have received this communication in error, please notify us immed=ately by return e-mail or by e-mail to [email protected] <mailto:jeevacation@gm=il.com> , and destroy this c=mmunication and all copies thereof, including all attachments. copyrigh= -all rights reserved --0000000000004f33270574eba595-- conversation-id 329584 date-last-viewed 0 date-received 1535930323 flags 8590195713 remote-id 850190 5 EFTA_R1_01836055 EFTA02625007

Technical Artifacts (16)

View in Artifacts Browser

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

Domaintwitter.com
Domainw.lawrencemkrauss.com
Domainwww.lawrencemkrauss.com
Phone2625003
Phone2625004
Phone2625005
Phone2625006
Phone2625007
Phone287-1404
Phone5930323
URLhttps://urldefe=se.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http
URLhttps://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http

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.