Thanks for the response.
I don�t know what evidence she has and I have no clear idea what is computer forensic examination. Once in a while I delete data from my computer to download new movies. I do remember that Plaintiff asked me to keep the computer data intact and I neglected her request and deleted data few times. Recently, a computer person collected the data (or compute forensic image) from my computer.
It seems to me that plaintiff wants to use the data deletion against me. She used �spoliation of evidence� few times after the data or forensic was collected from my computer.
The main problem with me is lack of money. Also my health condition requires me to be peaceful (I am counting my years due to a terminal illness). I am from Vietnam and my language is another obstacle to me. Plaintiff knew my situation and she wants her ego be satisfied through my admission of posting. I am messed up.
My questions are
(a). If plaintiff gives me in writing that no further legal action will be pursued against me once I make open admission then will it be reasonable to consider the settlement offer?
(b). What difference does it make on my job (I am working as office staff in a state agency) and on my public image if the court determines that I spoiled the evidence therefore I am guilty VERSUS settling the case by making a open admission and plaintiff gives me in writing that no further legal action will be pursued against me once I make open admission.
You would want any settlement agreement presented to you reviewed by an attorney in your area prior to signing, this to ensure your interests are protected.
As to the difference between admitting publicly on a website that you are guilty of writing (what I assume are defamatory) comments about a person or taking this to court, there are a few differences.
One difference is that, with the settlement agreement, you are not only admitting to doing something you say you didn't do, you must declare this publicly (which can cause harm to your reputation). If you carry this through to court, the court could find the plaintiff did not support his case sufficiently and there will be no finding of guilt. A court could find a lack of evidence supporting the plaintiff's claim or the court could find that what the plaintiff is claiming is defamatory is not, in fact, defamatory at all but pure opinion or rhetorical hyperbole or true. Or, it is also possible that the court could find there was spoliation of evidence and the jury can presume from this finding that the evidence destroyed is evidence of your guilt.
Another difference is that with the settlement agreement, you can put an end to a case that has consumed your thoughts for a long time now and is beginning to affect your health - but you must admit to being guilty of something for which you are not guilty. Without a settlement agreement, you must continue on to a trial and this trial may or may not end in your favor (so it is a gamble), but you do not have to admit to something you did not do.
A third difference is that, with a settlement agreement that is worded properly, you will not have to expend any more time or money on the case and you can with luck start to put this whole incident behind you. With court, more time and more money but a chance of escaping with your honesty and integrity intact.
You must weigh the pros and cons.
I have advised you in the past that you need to seek out the personal assistance of an attorney in your area. You were advised this when you were planning on fighting the claims against you and you are advised this now. You will want a personal review of any settlement agreement presented to you by the plaintiff, and you should not sign it without this review. But what you decide to do is ultimately up to you.
