There’s a guy in Hawaii selling “I bought this before I knew Elon was crazy” bumper stickers for $10, and he’s already sold over 10,000 this year.

I detest the “all homophobes are secretly gay” thing so much.

What it’s saying, in effect, is that queer people are responsible for our own oppression. Because if every homophobe is secretly queer, then no straight person can ever be homophobic. If they were, they wouldn’t be straight, by definition.

The only way that argument works is if we’re actually arguing that there is no such as being straight, and that everyone is at least 1% bisexual. There’s some basis for that, especially in studies of ancient cultures and uncontacted tribes. But until we start taking that seriously as an idea (and that is a very, very contentious idea to be taking seriously), this “Only queer people can be homophobic” nonsense has got to stop.

Upvoting for the pet tax.

So, I had to double check myself on this one, and my original answer wasn’t entirely correct.

If it is found that the destruction of evidence was intentional then yes, the jury can be instructed to view the missing information in the least favorable light, or a case can simply be outright dismissed or a default judgement entered.

However even in the case of “accidental” (ie, not provably intentional) deletion the court can still take various measures to redress the balance in some way.

I am not a lawyer but this guy is - https://joneskell.com/how-spoliation-of-evidence-impacts-litigation/

AFAIK that is, in fact, how juries are generally instructed to regard destruction of evidence.

Pretty good actually. But the odds of finding it are basically nil. A needle in a haystack would actually be easier.