Linked – Court Dismisses Plaintiff’s Complaint As Sanction for Doctored Emails
I’m not exactly sure how they thought this would work,
“For example, Email 3 – an email purportedly from Plaintiff to Defendant — stated, “[w]e are interested in cutting off training. We are interested in taking over the business and moving it forward. We believe we can do this.”
Yet, Email 4 — an email sent at the exact same time as Email 3 and also from Plaintiff to Defendant stated, “[we] are not interested in cutting off training. We are interested in taking over the business and moving it forward while still learning. We believe we can do this.”
The forensic examiner testified that Email 3 was found only on Plaintiff’s computer and was a fabrication; and Email 4 was found on both Plaintiff’s and Defendant’s computer. “
How did they expect to be able to produced a doctored copy of an email that would, obviously, also be present, in it’s original form on the other side’s computer? That’s just dumb.
But, it also goes to show that even if you think you’re not changing the document in any material way, like they were here, you just shouldn’t be editing them at all. It looks, and is, suspicious, and the metadata will always give it away. You’ll find yourself answering these same kinds of charges, not because you meant to doctor the email, but because you wanted that spreadsheet to just look nicer.
It’s not worth it. Leave it alone.
Court Dismisses Plaintiff’s Complaint As Sanction for Doctored Emails
Follow these topics: Links, LitigationSupport