Slack / Private Message Drop — page 1021

Yup, totally understand Eddie (which I hope I made clear). I personally _do_ think there's a way to do it without setting a precedent and that's the advice I have been given - but again, totally understand you (and others) can't agree to it. [2021-10-13 14:02:25] [Eddie Holmes] Yes, but I've had 3 FOIAs directly asking for this correspondence. There's one at the moment that will likely go to court. My University would also object to an FOIA on the grounds that the presumption is that this correspondence was meant to be confidential. Which of course it was. Plus the emails don't get into the fact that the intelligence services were informed throughout. [2021-10-13 14:03:30] [Andrew Rambaut] I am in the same position. We have been asked for huge tranches of emails and we are refusing to say what exists even. [2021-10-13 14:04:41] [Andrew Rambaut] I will check with our lawyer but it only requires one of us to say no. [2021-10-13 14:06:11] [Eddie Holmes] I have to say no [2021-10-13 14:06:30] [Andrew Rambaut] That's what I mean. [2021-10-13 14:07:13] [Andrew Rambaut] I don't know what happens if we get overruled - I guess we just have to redact them in the same way they are already redacted [2021-10-13 14:10:58] [Eddie Holmes] Ron's is the most interesting [2021-10-13 14:12:12] [Eddie Holmes] I also suspect a release would not help SAGO [2021-10-13 14:12:19] [Kristian Andersen] I suggest you both just say "no" to Jeremy - or have the lawyers say "no". He/they will then have to figure out what to do next. [2021-10-13 14:12:45] [Eddie Holmes] I said no already. Very clearly!!! [2021-10-13 14:12:57] [Kristian Andersen] You did... Bears repeating :wink: [2021-10-13 14:13:04] [Andrew Rambaut]