Chat message

Slack / Private Message Drop, p.991 [SLACK_001205] · slack_pm:msg:10335

Date: 2021-08-16 17:21
Type: chat message · slack
recipient: Robert F. Garry, Edward C. Holmes, Andrew Rambaut
speaker: Kristian G. Andersen

Recipients on this medium are inferred from channel membership, not per-message addressing.

On the topic of emails. My institution (via our outside council) will produce a written response to the two congressmen that requested to see BossMan. I have attached the draft letter - please keep confidential. One question pertains to emails we would like to include (confidentially) - specifically "Ron's" notes and also Andrew's emails (see attached). These are confidential, but with the likes of Jordan, nothing is every fully certain -so with that in mind, any concerns about us including this email chain? Of course, it's available already, but(unhelpfully) heavily redacted. I'm sure litigation is ongoing though, so the whole thing will probably be public atsome point. Please let me know if you have any concerns about any of this. [shared file(s): Email 2.pdf, Scripps Research Submission to RMs Comer and Jordan 8 16 21 CLEAN.DOCX]

In context

A single line often inverts meaning once you see what it answers, so neighbouring messages are always shown.

2021-08-16 17:08 Kristian G. Andersen open

On the topic of on-point emails, this reply from Jezza is pretty darn spot on too - everything he says, well, all playing out. [shared file(s): Screen Shot 2021-08-16 at 5.07.59 PM.png]
2021-08-16 17:21 Kristian G. Andersen

On the topic of emails. My institution (via our outside council) will produce a written response to the two congressmen that requested to see BossMan. I have attached the draft letter - please keep confidential. One question pertains to emails we would like to include (confidentially) - specifically "Ron's" notes and also Andrew's emails (see attached). These are confidential, but with the likes of Jordan, nothing is every fully certain -so with that in mind, any concerns about us including this email chain? Of course, it's available already, but(unhelpfully) heavily redacted. I'm sure litigation is ongoing though, so the whole thing will probably be public atsome point. Please let me know if you have any concerns about any of this. [shared file(s): Email 2.pdf, Scripps Research Submission to RMs Comer and Jordan 8 16 21 CLEAN.DOCX]
2021-08-16 17:34 Edward C. Holmes open

I don't think we should release ANY emails unless we absolutely have to. The problem is that if an email is releasedto one organisation then that acts as a precedent for others to ask. So, I'm strongly against.
2021-08-16 17:36 Edward C. Holmes open

This is what my lawyers told me.
2021-08-16 17:37 Andrew Rambaut open

I have no individual problem with my email going in there - it is exactly what I still believe. But I agree with Eddie. However - one request/suggestion. If you do send emails it is better not to have them as a nested thread so you can see who responded to who. Just have them as individual emails with their own headers. Also remove my signaturefrom the bottom.
2021-08-16 17:42 Kristian G. Andersen open

I agree with Eddie's concern and I flagged this exact issue with the lawyers. The difference here being that we're dealing with a confidential response to congress and not entities like US RTK.That said, I'm in agreement with Eddie's concern, so let me relay that to our lawyers - I think they'll chose to _not_ include based on that feedback. (Emails 1 and 3 will be included, but they're already public unredacted).

Full conversation →