The Office of the Attorney General of Virginia has filed a “defective” brief, as Brian’s labels the Appellee’s brief in opposition to Brian D. Hill’s two pending appeals. Brian D. Hill is formerly USWGO Alternative News. The two pending appeals concern two court orders denying Brian’s motion for either a judgment of acquittal or motion for a new trial by jury. This is within the Court of Appeals of Virginia, a state court. The Attorney General’s opposition brief argued that if Brian proves destruction of Brady material evidence by the Commonwealth Attorney or Martinsville Police Department, then it would be considered intrinsic fraud which could “obscure” the alleged “facts” of guilt presented to a jury. When a party does not comply with multiple court orders, it is usually a contempt of court. When a party fails or refuses to comply with court orders for discovery material, the judge can decide to allow the adverse party in a case to push for an “adverse inference” allowing a jury to be instructed on the fact of destruction of evidence by the government prosecutor favorable to the other party in a criminal case or civil case. Usually destruction of evidence is a sign that the case prosecuted may have been a weak or unfounded case.
