Hacker News Reader

Don't currently have? Sure. The quote says "At that time, we had no evidence" so I think that would be harder to argue. You could maybe make the case the statement means: At that specific moment we didn't have any evidence because we already destroyed it. But it certainly implies they mean they had not found any before that point in time.

To be sure, use a clean room implementation: let IT destroy all the evidence, always. Then legal can claim 'we don't have any evidence'.

source: I am not a lawyer

Works the same way with government. The "I am not aware of ..." is a great trick for when your organization is intentionally silod. The folks who get subpoenaed are left out of detailed info. It's a complete non-statement.

I could bring up examples across both sides of the isle. It's all a big game.

haha. I am a lawyer so sorry, but while you might be able to claim that, you are legally and ethically obligated to also divulge the intentional spoiling of hte evidence.

As if the people giving orders at some of these companies care about ethics... ;)