Re: Attorney fail
And the failure is an unnecessary conflict, based upon your version of events and a vacuum from the opposing side.
It's predicated upon two concepts that interlock in IS and organizational duties that are paramount.
Due care and due diligence.
If you showed me that my castle door keys were openly available and you're retaining a copy to protect your interests, I'd not have a warm and fuzzy feeling of comfort, as I have no idea if your security is any better than our own!
I'm a bit more reasonable, at a cost of billable hours in seeking a mutually agreed upon common ground for a secure data custodian, who will represent your interests, upon mutually agreed upon common interests grounds. And add, in my jurisdiction, said data is evidence and needs to be protected from all, including us and our concerned parties and only the courts may access said data, pending an order from said courts.
What I'd try to avoid, from the company side is exposure, potential blackmail or compromise of now secured data.
Once mutually agreed upon, we'd move forward and avoid the courts and we'd happily ensure a trust is established to secure the data - outside of either of our controls, save if the trust fails and then, we have a common problem.
In my jurisdiction, you've committed a crime. You willfully destroyed evidence in a matter presented to the court. It is the matter of contention and controversy, hence, evidence.
Due care and due diligence requires I expend the least resources for the maximum gain.
So, securing the data is paramount. I'd have an olive branch in reserve, a joint paper on how to protect data, ensure organizational security and serve common cause via said paper.
Currently, the organization has a huge black eye and you have legal bills, as does the organization. Any victory from that is Pyrrhic indeed!