|
for the litigators
State claims in a verified response to discovery they don't have video footage. At clsimant's deposition, they attempt to prove claimant was not injured, as she claims. Only problem is, the video is not claimant. On the other hand, the clips ARE enough to prove the video State claimed didn't exist did, in fact exist.
State's counsel admits to spoliation of evidence. And perjury. Does the destruction of evidence and perjury support federal 1983 or 1984 action?
__________________
Send in the evil clowns.
|
