EFTA00863693.pdf

From: Lawrence Krauss To: Nancy Portland -4 Cc: Adam Waldman Subject: Re: interesting bit of uk law that relates Date: Fri, 09 Mar 2018 21:37:50 +0000 Inline-Images: image002.png I believe we go after the woman who filed the complaint. We have evidence, which we can call, even if we have to call the Dean at ANU as a witness, that this individual made false claims about the incident in her report to the University, both about the existence of a complaint at the time, and about the existence of a photo, which she could not produce. I think we have a solid case in Australia and at this point I feel we would be unwise not to proceed in Australia against her individually, and against Gizmodo Australia. The only question is how, and what cost? Lawrence Lawrence M. Krauss Director, The Origins Project at ASU Co-Director, Cosmology Initiative Foundation Professor School of Earth & Space Exploration and Physics Department Arizona State University, P.O. Box 871404, Tempe, AZ 85287.1404 Research Office: I Assistant (Jessica): Origins Office (Cynthia): origins.asu.edu krauss.faculty.asu.edu Vr On Mar 9, 2018, at 1:24 PM, Nancy Dahl > wrote: for investigation. Begin forwarded message: From: "Buck McWilliam (via Twitter)" < Subject: Buck McWilliam (@McwilliamBuck) has sent you a Direct Message on Twitter! Date: March 9. 2018 at 10:53:02 AM PST To: Nancy Dahl < EFTA00863693 Buck McWilliam sent you a Direct Message. No, I have never heard of that UK firm. Sorry I don't have any contacts that would be useful for you. A named alleged eyewitness to the alleged Australian grabbing incident appears to be British: Michael Marsh (if I recall the name correctly). I am not a lawyer, but I am adjacent to the legal profession, so I know a little about that world (a little knowledge is a dangerous thing, of course, your mileage may vary!) I know enough about British libel law to know that Lawrence probably has grounds to sue him personally. Under UK defamation law, I am pretty sure Lawrence has a right to his reputation and to prevail, the respondent would have to convince the court that Krauss definitely grabbed a woman's breast in public. If he fails to demonstrate the truth of his allegation in the English court, my understanding is that Lawrence wins by default. I suggest you sign up to some UK defamation law discussion boards and study the topic carefully. Don't be too slow to file a claim: time limits may apply after which too much time may be found to have passed for Lawrence to pursue a EFTA00863694  claim. If indeed the law is favorable to Lawrence, a libel action against the British source might very well produce a retraction and an apology from him. It won't be cheap, but you may decide that a partial vindication is enough to justify the cost. Defending a libel action is rather costly, and legal aid isn't provided by the state for defamation cases. So very few libel actions are defended. The fact that the woman whose breast was allegedly grabbed never even spoke to police (or indeed anyone) leads me to doubt she'll travel to London to testify against Lawrence. Reply Settings I Help I Opt-out I Download app Twitter. Inc. 1355 Market Street, Suite 900 San Francisco, CA 94103 EFTA00863695