From: Lawrence Krauss <██████████████>
Sent: Monday, February 26, 2018 3:49 PM
To: ███████████████████████
Subject: Fwd: URGENT: BuzzFeed News inquiry re allegations of sexual harassment by
Lawrence Krauss

The correspondence from Ron Lindsey to Pete= Aldhous.

Director, The Origins Project a= ASU Foundation Professor School of Earth & Space E=ploration and Physics Department Arizona State University,&=bsp;P.O. Box 871404, =/a>Tempe, AZ 85287-=404 Assistant (Jessica): <tel > <u>Origins Office</u> (Cynthia):&nbs <tel > <=ont color="#000000" <mailto &n=sp

Sent from my iPhone

Begin forwarded message:

From: Ronald Lindsay <████████████████ <mailto:████████████████> >
Date: February 26, 2018 at 7:=7:07 AM PST
To: ████████████████ <mailto:████████████████>
Subject: Fwd: Fwd: URGENT: BuzzFeed News inquiry r= allegations of sexual harassment by Lawrence Krauss

My corresponden=e with Aldhous. As usual, read from the bottom up.

Forwarded message
From: Ronald Lindsay < Ronald Lindsay <mailto: Ronald Lindsay > >=/span>
Date: Mon, Dec 11, 2017 at 7:21 AM
Subject: Re: Fwd: URGENT: B=zzFeed News inquiry re allegations of sexual harassment by Lawrence Krauss<=>To: Peter Aldhous < Peter Aldhous <mailto: Peter Aldhous > >

Dear Mr. Aldh=us,

Adam Isaak resigned because I had a public spa= with his girlfriend, Rebecca Watson, who had issued a public call for CFI e=ployees to quit. (That dispute is a whole other story, tangential to your K=auss piece, so I will not get into it here.)

mid-May, after which Timin= Adam is stopped important showing here. up The for email work. from (He Pat said=he was in was March. sick & The then dispute went with on vacation, Watso= or started vice versa). in He then then left s=me time in June. If the Krauss matter "pushed (him] over the edge," then he=was tenaciously hanging on to the ledge for a few months.

The email from Pat Beauchamp was in the first person and Pat indicat=d she was speaking for herself. (I found the email exchange last night; I w=ll forward it to you.) Adam had never been shy about expressing his concern= to me -- he asked for raises, complained about the hosts on the podcast he=was producing etc. The notion that he and Pat were working together but tha= he decided he could not reveal his participation is difficult to credit.</=iv>

I will be traveling to my home this evening. Plan to=reach my home by 7:45, but if I don't answer right away, please try a bit l=ter. My number is: | <tel: > .

Sincerely,

R. Lindsay

On Sun, Dec 10, 2017 at 10=45 PM, Peter Aldhous <blackened out> <mailto:blackened out> > wr=te:

Dear Mr. Lindsay,

Thank you for your response, which we will consider in detail. Shall we speak at 7.45pm Eastern tomorrow? Do let me know what number to call.

To answer your question, the CFI employee who resigned was Adam Isaak. He told us that he helped Patricia Beauchamp draft an email to you outlining their concerns about inviting Lawrence Krauss on the 2014 cruise.

He explained that his resignation had a broader context, relating to his concerns about sexism and online harassment in the skeptical movement. But he said that CFI's continued embrace of Krauss, in the face of concerns expressed by staff, was what "pushed me over the edge."

Sincerely,

Peter Aldhous

## On 12/10/17 7:27 PM, Ronald Lindsay wrote:

## =ear Mr. Aldhous,

=et me note a couple of things at the outset. First, I would be happy <u>to speak</u> to you regarding the allegations in your email. You can reach me at my cell phone number, which is -

## =ear Mr. Aldhous, (cont.)

<tel > . However, I am unavailable tomorrow (Monday) because of prior commitments until approximately 7:45 PM.

=ext, you should know that I'm not an employee of CFI nor do I have any authority to speak on behalf of CFI. I'm writing to you from my personal email account in part to underscore that point. I do retain a CFI email address in part as a courtesy to me and in part because it serves a business purpose (for example, I still receive occasional emails addressed to the president of the organization).

=urning to the substance of your allegations, first you should be aware that I take the issue of sexual harassment very seriously. This is confirmed by the fact that after I was hired by CFI as its in-house lawyer zero-tolerance (a position harassment I held prior policy to becoming covering president workplace and harassment. CEO) I insisted Moreover, that the during organization the time adopt I was a president comprehensive and CEO we had three separate state trainings for the entire staff on sexual harassment issues. In addition, where necessary, we did not hesitate to expend significant resources, including retaining outside investigators, to conduct serious, detailed inquiries into harassment claims. One such inquiry cost the organization over $40,000. Therefore, any suggestion that I do not personally take harassment claims seriously is amply disconfirmed by my record.

=egarding the alleged incident on the 2011 cruise, the first I became aware of it was when Pat Beauchamp, CFI =99s business manager and the employee responsible for cruise logistics, wrote to me in 2013 indicating she objected to inviting Lawrence Krauss on our upcoming Galapagos cruise. I found this strange, and I responded to her almost immediately asking the reasons for her objection. She gave two reasons. The first was that Krauss did not pay sufficient attention to the guests on the 2011 cruise. I had heard this concern from one guest myself; on the other hand, I also heard from several guests that they thought Krauss's presentations were= excellent and a highlight of the cruise. Accordingly, I did not give this concern much weight.

=he second reason was that Krauss had allegedly asked a female guest on the cruise to join him and his partner, apparently for some sort of sexual activity (I cannot recall whether Krauss was engaged or married or just seriously involved with his female companion at the time, although they were clearly romantically involved and seemed very much in love). This is the first I had heard of this proposition. No complaint by the guest or anyone else had been made to me at the time of the cruise, although I was on the cruise and clearly visible throughout the cruise.

= asked Ms. Beauchamp for contact information for this guest. I did call the guest and she substantially confirmed what Ms. Beauchamp had said. I apologized on behalf of the organization. The guest indicated although she was taken aback by Krauss's proposition=at the time, she did not want to pursue the matter further. I then got in contact with Krauss. Krauss denied the allegation. In light of the guest's reluctance to pursue the matter and Krauss's own denial and, importantly, because between the time of the 2011 cruise and the Galapagos cruise we had instituted a policy regarding harassment at any CFI event, which covers not just employees, but speakers and attendees, I decided to go ahead with my plan and have Krauss as a speaker on the Galapagos cruise. Krauss was fully aware of our harassment policy regarding CFI events because we had had a discussion about it. Therefore, I expected him to comply with that policy on the Galapagos cruise. As far as I know he did, because we received no complaints about his conduct. Nor have we received any complaints about his conduct at other events.

=et me just take a moment to highlight the 2012 policy, which you can find in full here, http://www.centerforinquiry.n=wbr>et/blogs/entry/cfis_new_policy_on_hostile_conduct_harassment_=t_conferences/ along with the announcement I made explaining the rationale for the policy. This policy was, certainly at its time, arguably the strongest any nonprofit organization had regarding conduct at its events. Again, this policy shows that any suggestion that CFI, as an organization, or that I personally took a lax attitude regarding harassment is completely without factual foundation.

=n your email you mentioned that one staffer resigned after I invited Krauss on the Galapagos cruise. I'm n=t aware of any staffer resigning because of that. If you give me a name I could comment on the

## =ear Mr. Aldhous, (cont.)

reasons for the staffer leaving. Ms. Beauchamp remained an employee of CFI (and went on the Galapagos cruise with Krauss).

=ou mentioned also the comments that were made to me in March 2012 by Melody Hensley. Let me give you the background for that. CFI was holding an event prior to the 2012 Reason Rally in DC. Richard Dawkins, Jessica Alquist, Jamie Raskin, and Lawrence Krauss were scheduled to speak at the event. Melody Hensley was heavily involved in the planning for the event and in fact was tapped to make introductions for the speakers, including Krauss. (At the time she was in charge of the DC local branch.) During the planning for the event she gave no indication whatsoever that she had any hesitation about introducing or dealing with Krauss. (I will forward you some email correspondence confirming this.)

=s I recall, Krauss's schedule resulted in his planned arrival being a little later than the others. As it turned out, he was even further delayed. At some point when it became clear that Krauss was going to be late, Hensley turned to me and said, "I know why Kra=ss isn't coming; he's embarrassed to see me." I asked Hensley what she mea=t by this. She said Krauss had made a pass at her several years earlier and she had rebuffed him. I asked for some details. She said she was in a hotel room with him (I can't recall whether she said it was Krauss's hotel room, but I t=ink it was), and that Krauss tried to kiss her. She pushed him away and said she wasn't interested. I asked if Krauss persisted; she said he did not. Thinking out loud, I believe I said something to the effect of 'well, if you want t= make a complaint you probably can, although I'm not sure our policy at that time w=uld cover that.' Ms. Hensley said she was not interested in making a formal complaint.

=s. Hensley's statement that I "responded to her with silence" is absolutely false and I categorically and= unqualifiedly deny it. We talked about her concern, as indicated. Ms. Hensley= recall must be failing her.

=iven the passage of time (six years), the fact that Hensley did not want to pursue the matter, the fact that Krauss desisted when Hensley indicated she wasn't interested, the fact th=t Hensley didn't even seem very bothered by the incident (as indicated, she had expressed no hesitation in seeing Krauss), and the fact that we had no policy covering conduct by nonemployees back in 2006 (in fact, CFI's zero-toler=nce policy covering employees themselves was not implemented until 2007, I believe -- I was just hired as the attorney in July 2006), I decided not to do any further about this particular incident. However, the incident, along with observations I heard at the Women in Secularism conference which we held later in the spring of 2012 (observations which did not mention Krauss, but rather some speakers at non-CFI events), was a factor in my thinking about the need for a policy covering conduct by invited speakers and guests at CFI conferences.

=s. Hensley made no other complaint to me about Krauss, nor did she ever express to me her belief that we should not invite Krauss to events.

=n closing, let me state that any accusations stating that I neglected to take harassment complaints seriously are false. Furthermore, I would regard them as a malicious attack on my character and my professional reputation.

=incerely,
=onald A. Lindsay

Forwarded message

From: Ronald Lindsay

Date: Sun, Dec 10, 2017 at 8:13 PM

4

## =ear Mr. Aldhous, (cont.)

Lawrence Krauss

Subject: URGENT: BuzzFeed News inquiry re allegations of sexual harassment by

To: ████████████████████████ <mailto:████████████████████████>

Mr. Lindsay:

I'm a reporter for BuzzFeed News who has been investigating sexu=l misconduct allegations against Lawrence Krauss.

The story concerns Krauss's actions towards students while a pro=essor of physics at Case Western Reserve University, as well as his conduct=in non-academic settings as a prominent figure in the skeptics movement. I a= reporting this story along with two of my colleagues on the science desk, A=een Ghorayshi and Virginia Hughes.

Our story is about several allegations of sexual misconduct dating from 2=06 to 2016. Our reporting also goes into how the various institutions Kraus= has been affiliated with — Case Western, Arizona State University,=the Australian National University, the New College of the Humanities and t=e Center for Inquiry, for which you formerly served as president — h=ve handled complaints and concerns about his behavior during this time.

Our story is corroborated by emails, university documents, official comp=aints, testimony from victims and witnesses, and interviews with more than t=o dozen of Krauss's current and former academic colleagues, student=, and peers in the skeptics movement.

I am writing to you now because you are personally named in the story, a=d because you had executive responsibility for CFI's actions during=the time of some of the alleged incidents.

I wanted to offer you the opportunity to comment and/or respond to the m=in facts we plan to publish regarding your involvement as the former head o= CFI during this time. If you wish to comment on any of these findings, we n=ed to hear from you as soon as possible. We are planning on publishing our story T=esday morning US Eastern Time.

Based on our reporting so far, this is what we plan to publish that conc=rns you:

One incident involving Krauss allegedly occurred in May 2011 on a </=pan>CFI cruise <https://www.youtube.com/watch=v=qnrR8B-IKxE> .

## =ear Mr. Aldhous, (cont.)

* Attendees had paid several thousand dollars to join a cultural tour=of the Greek
islands, featuring lectures from scientists and writers, inclu=ing Krauss.

* Krauss allegedly propositioned a female cruise-goer, who rejected an=invitation
to join him and his female companion for sex in their cabin.

* No complaint was made, but the incident was reported to a CFI staffe= at the
time.

* CFI’s leadership continued to embrace Krauss, making him
<https://www.centerforinquiry.net/newsroom=krauss_named_honorary_board_member/> an honorary member o= its
board of directors in December 2011.

* But at least two staffers were sufficiently concerned about reports o= Krauss’s
behavior that they urged you not to invite him on a 2014 <=span>cruise
<http://action.centerforinqui=y.net/site/MessageViewer?em_id=49328.0> of the Galápag=s Islands.

* In June 2013, after you rejected their advice and invited him on the=cruise, one
of those staffers resigned.

* At a conference in March 2012, another woman, who at that point was a=so an
employee of CFI, told you about an incident in 2006 in which Krauss f=rcibly kissed and groped her in a hotel room.
According to this woman, afte= she told you about this in person, you responded to her with silence.

* The woman later told two other employees in CFI’s management=about the
incident, and expressed her discomfort at having Krauss continue t= speak at events.

* CFI continued to book Krauss as a speaker at its events.

Again, if you wish to comment on or clarify any of these points, please g=t in touch with us as soon as possible. If I do not respond immediately it i= because I am on another call, so please leave the best phone number to rea=h you.

Thanks,

Peter Aldhous' contact information includes a phone number and email, both redacted.

=span class="m_6530976094949947939m_-4897364513939525238gmail-m_-556482939=921005860HOEnZb">
--
Peter Aldhous, PhD
Science reporter | Bu=zFeed News
tel:  <tel: >
<mailto: >
6

## =ear Mr. Aldhous, (cont.)

- Signature 1
  - Role: Senior Research Fellow
  - Affiliation: Center for Inquiry
  - Email: [redacted/blackened]
  - Cell: [redacted/blackened]

- Signature 2
  - Credential: PhD
  - Role: Science reporter
  - Affiliation: BuzzFeed News
  - Tel: [redacted/blackened]
  - Cell: [redacted/blackened]
  - Email: [redacted/blackened]
  - Social/web links: Twitter handle and personal website are present but redacted/blackened in image