When is it appropriate to destroy evidence?

The premise behind evidence preservation is a fundamental principle in both criminal and civil investigations. Evidence functions as a key element that supports the integrity of the judicial process; its destruction could impede justice and impact the outcome of a case. Preserving evidence ensures that it remains available for examination, analysis, and presentation, regardless of its perceived relevance at any point during an investigation.

While there may be situations where certain materials might be deemed irrelevant, this determination often requires careful scrutiny and should be governed by established legal protocols. Moreover, the process of deciding what is relevant or irrelevant can change as a case evolves, which makes premature destruction risky.

Additionally, destroying evidence under any circumstances, even if the decision comes from a superior, raises ethical and legal issues. Engaging in such practices could potentially lead to serious consequences, including obstruction of justice. Therefore, the overarching and most prudent guideline is that evidence must always be preserved to uphold the principles of legality, fairness, and accountability in investigative practices.