EFTA02618280.pdf

From: Lawrence Krauss Sent: Monday, October 22, 2018 8:54 PM To: J; nancy dahl Cc: Lawrence Krauss Subject: Fwd: Krauss - urgent re compliance with agreement I =hink the simple answer is 'no', but if not, how about =he following response?: Thanks for your note, which Justin has passed along. I have =o intent to disparage the University, and do not think I have. I =eleased a factual statement to the press about my situation as I =nderstood it, without commentary about the University. Our =greement clearly states that release of factual information is not =isparaging. I explained the University process as I experienced =t and as it was explained to me by the University, without further =ommentary. If that information is disparaging, the University should =eview its policies. My statement about the atmosphere at the University =ot being conducive to were I were to return has nothing to do with the =niversity. It has to do with the publicity surrounding my =ituation and my concerns for my own protection should I be in any =nvironment where future false claims could be lodged against me. =oreover, your email falsely claims that I released my retirement letter =o President Crow to the press, which I most certainly did not. =nbsp;Such a false and damaging claim is disparaging to me, and I am =pset that you have made such a claim without verification. Please =efrain from this in the future. As far as my retirement letter =o President Crow is concerned: first, that is personal correspondence =etween me and him, which I have no intent to release to the public. =econd, the purpose of its content as I clearly explain in the letter, =s to communicate facts to him as I experienced them associated with my =ecision to retire that President Crow can explore to help the =niversity and protect the University Community in the future. =nbsp;Concerns raised in the interest of helping the University in a =rivate letter between me and the President explaining my decision to =etire are not disparaging. Lawrence M. =rauss Professor School of Earth & Space =xploration and Physics Department Arizona State =niversity, P.O. Box 871404, Tempe, AZ 85287-1404 Research Office I Assistant (Jessica): =nbsp; I twitter.com/Ikraussl I www.lawrencemkrauss.com Begin forwarded message: From: =/b>Justin Dillon Subject: =/b>Fwd: Krauss - =rgent re compliance with agreement Date: =/b>October 22, 2018 at 1:35:08 PM =DT EFTA_R1_01821448 EFTA02618280 To: =/b>lawrence Krauss < > FYI. In meetings; can check email again later. I should =espond in some fashion, but tomorrow is fine. Justin Dillon Please note new address: KaiserDillon PLLC 1099 14th St. NW 8th Floor West Washin ton DC 20005 www.kaiserdillon.com <http://www.kaiserdillon.com/> Begin forwarded message: From: Kimberly Demarchi Subject: RE: Krauss - =rgent re compliance with agreement Date: October 22, 2018 at 4:29:24 PM =DT To: Justin Dillon Justin, Is there any additional confirmation you can provide regarding Dr. =rauss's response on this issue? Thanks, Kim Kimberly A. Demarchi Profile I Add me to your address book chttp://www.omlaw.com/> <http://www.omlaw.com/> 2929 North Central Avenue 21st Floor Phoenix, Arizona 85012 omlaw.com <http://www.omlaw.com/> From: Justin Dillon < > Sent: Sunday, October 21 2018 =:01 PM To: Kimberly Demarchi Subject: Re: Krauss - urgent re =ompliance with agreement 2 EFTA_R1_01821449 EFTA02618281  Thanks, Kim. I will communicate that to him. Justin Dillon KaiserDillon PLLC 1401 K St. NW Suite 600 Washin ton DC 20005 From: Kimberly =emarchi Sent: Sunday, October 21, 2018 =:42:28 PM To: Justin Dillon Subject: RE: Krauss - urgent re =ompliance with agreement Justin, So far, through his retirement letter (which he provided to the press) =nd his Twitter statements, Dr. Krauss has made at least the following =isparaging statements: • The University is not committed to a safe and productive working =nvironment. • During the processes of investigation, determinations, appeal and =onciliation, the University violated due process, disregarded evidence, =nd engaged in discrimination, bias, violation of ABOR regulations, and =onduct that was unprofessional, adversarial, hostile, disingenuous, and unresponsive. • The review process included incomplete access to evidence and =ccusations during the investigation, no opportunity to cross-examine =itnesses or be represented by a lawyer, and no option to directly =ppeal the determinations. He would only have the opportunity to directly challenge the credibility =f his accusers or the veracity of their claims if he first agreed to be =ismissed. • Regardless of the outcome of the appeal process, he would not experience =n environment conducive to continuing his teaching, research, and =ervice activities. His letter also seems to indicate he plans to make further statements in = second communication to the President. Kim From: Justin Dillon Sent: Sunday, October 21, 2018 =:37 PM To: Kimberly Demarchi Subject: Re: Krauss - urgent re =ompliance with agreement Importance: High Kim, Thanks for sharing your concerns. Could you please be specific =bout what you believe constituted disparagement in violation of the =greement, so I can communicate that to Professor Krauss? 3 EFTA_R1_01821450 EFTA02618282  Thanks, Justin Justin Dillon KaiserDillon PLLC 1401 K Street NW Suite 600 Washin ton DC 20005 www.kaiserdillon.com <http://www.kaiserdillon.com/> On Oct 21, 2018, at 5:13 PM, Kimberly Demarchi =rote: Justin, We have a serious problem, and I'm writing to ask for your help =n resolving it before it becomes worse. The retirement letter your client submitted yesterday (copy attached) =id not simply announce his retirement, but instead made several =isparaging statements about the University and the investigation =rocess. He then released a statement on Twitter with additional commentary (see below) and contacted the State Press. He did this =espite being aware that the University did not intend to make the =greed•upon, limited statement until Monday, a timing that we announced =n order to accommodate his stated desire to request additional redactions of the public records that will be released =ursuant to our legal obligations. Or. Krauss's statements violate the non-disparagement provisions =1 the agreement, and the timing and nature of the statements is a =ransparent attempt to do so before the University could release the =imited and neutral statement to which the parties have agreed. At this point, I've managed to convince my clients that it would =e better to simply make their planned statements and document releases, =nswer any media questions consistent with their non•disparagement =bligations, and move on. But if your client continues with these kinds of disparaging public statements, we will =ave no choice but to deem Dr. Krauss in violation of the agreement and =ursue all available remedies, which could include invalidating any =bligation to make further payments of compensation and benefits or to consent to a return of donated funds. It would be better for both of our clients to put this behind them and =o their separate ways. I implore you to reason with your client, =efore his conduct escalates and this dispute becomes worse. Kim Kimberly A. Demarchi Profile I Add me to =our address book <http://www.omlaw.com/> 2929 North Central Avenue 21st Floor Phoenix, Arizona 85012 <http://goo.gl/maps/Qtnqo> 4 EFTA_R1_01821451 EFTA02618283 =11<mailto:kdemarchi@omlaw.com> omlaw.com <http://www.omlaw.com/> TWITTER STATEMENT: <image001.png> <retirementlmk.pdf> 5 EFTA_R1_01821452 EFTA02618284