Epstein Secrets

s Dear =s. Saadiq: My =ame is Adam Waldman, and I am Professor Lawrence Krauss' =itigation counsel. Earlier this week, I sent the attached letter =o Buzzfeed via one of their reporters named Peter Aldhous. =nbsp; I =m also in receipt of Mr. Aldhous' letter to ASU, which is a =ariation on defamation — both

eted its fact =athering. Our courts recognize that participants in an =dministrative investigation have a privilege against a defamation =harge. In Paros v. Hoemako Hospital, 140 =riz. 335, 681 P.2d 918 (Ct. App. Div. 2 1984), the court recognized =hat the employer's response to a notice of charge of =iscrimination filed

tandi=g that your office believes it is compelled by the above to investigate fa=se, defamatory, anonymous accusations posited by the online tabloid Buzzfe=d by contacting third parties and potentially rebroadcasting the tabloid B=zzfeed's accusations. To be clear, these accusations were no= made to the

Times=New Roman",serif'> Our courts recognize that participants in=an administrative investigation have a privilege against a defamation char=e. In Paros v. Hoemako Hospital, 140 Ariz. 335, 681 P.2d 918 (Ct. App. Di=. 2 1984), the court recognized that the employer's response to a =otice of charge of discrimination filed

us and his =olleagues have been manufacturing for at least 6 months (notably without a=y reporting) in a campaign with a purpose known only to them. Buzzfe=d's first method is to call or write third parties, posit a list o= fake, anonymous, recklessly false and malicious "allegations,Q=8040 and ask if t

657719 EFTA02520780 * Our courts recog=ize that participants in an administrative investigation have a privilege =gainst a defamation charge. In Paros v. Hoemako Hospital, 140 Ariz. 335= 681 P.2d 918 (Ct. App. Div. 2 1984), the court recognized that the employ=r's response to a notice of charge of discrimination filed