----- Original Message ----- From: "Jim Choate" <ravage@einstein.ssz.com> ...
It's even a crime to destroy evidence in a civil (ie non-criminal) case.
That's why you hear about companies creating "data retention" policies. They're not really about "retention". The company sets standards that stipulate what records should be kept, how long, and most importantly to the company that they should be destroyed after the official retention time has passed. By setting forth such a policy they can tell a plaintiff "We're sorry, we don't have those documents/e-mails/data anymore. That data has been destroyed per our records retention policy". If they can prove that they have a policy and are following it, they can't be accused of destroying evidence. Nifty Huh ? In defense of companies, it keeps ambulance chasers from subpoenaing ALL the company's records and then finding some information (a disgruntled employee's e-mail rant), that taken of context, makes the company appear guilty. After e-mails were used by the DOJ as "evidence" that Micro$oft was guilty of "anti-competitive" practices, it was quietly proposed by legal department at a company I know of that the e-mail system be configured to automatically delete users e-mail after a set time period, and not allow the easy off-line storage of messages. It was handily rejected by the IT department as impossible to implement and shouted down by many managers who didn't want their CYA e-mails automatically deleted. Neil M. Johnson njohnson@interl.net http://www.interl.net/~njohnson PGP Key Finger Print: 93C0 793F B66E A0C7 CEEA 3E92 6B99 2DCC