The
spoliation of evidence is the intentional or negligent withholding, hiding, altering, or destroying of
evidence relevant to a legal proceeding.
[1] Spoliation has two possible consequences: in jurisdictions where the (intentional) act is criminal by
statute, it may result in fines and
incarceration for the parties who engaged in the spoliation; in jurisdictions where relevant
case law precedent has been established, proceedings possibly altered by spoliation may be interpreted under a
spoliation inference.
The spoliation inference is a negative evidentiary inference that a finder of fact can draw from a party's destruction of a document or thing that is relevant to an ongoing or reasonably foreseeable civil or criminal proceeding: the finder of fact can review all evidence uncovered in as strong a light as possible against the spoliator and in favor of the opposing party.
The theory of the spoliation inference is that when a party destroys evidence, it may be reasonable to infer that the party had "consciousness of guilt" or other motivation to avoid the evidence. Therefore, the factfinder may conclude that the evidence would have been unfavorable to the spoliator. Some
jurisdictions have recognized a spoliation
tort action, which allows the victim of destruction of evidence to file a separate tort action against a
spoliator.
[2]
