Does spoliation shift the burden of proof in a summary judgment motion?

QUESTION(S) PRESENTED No. 2 , Suoer— |s spaliaHon a burden ohifting mechanism ? LONG Does the destrucHon of video Surveillance by State defendant/actors shift + a greater. burden of paot upon the stele defendants (or the, pucpese of summary jdgment) when tne video surveillance Fs primary, Objective evidence cancecning plai ndffp, state prisoners Claims ? No. ‘L SHORT Does a citizen of +tHhe United Stites have the right to refuse tp sign a false narvah ve report ? LONG = Is @ claim foe retaliation perfected against a tle actor / defendant when OFler a Slate Prisoner / plain FF refuses to sign a false harrah ve re por+ t nid state attr / detendant writes a False infra cton repack 4dhat otites no less Hen three Himes , “He oH refused to sign, "htc wlHmetely lead +o the plain ls. fecminotin fam a high quality Prison ‘ob? Are the infachon report, spoliated Surveillance, and plainhifs well briefed (WY oxhibids) tesHimeny Grounds toe trial ? Quésrion’s pResenTéo Pace 2 No. 3 . SmerIn rekerene to & clrim tor retalintion, i's He , fime line of evends ; When Com pounded by teladive dotumend and fads sopperbiny stoke actors JdeLonolands interests tor motive and fioximity to the retalitary act and fimelined events | enough do Warrant drial ? LING Defendants Liled a folse misbehavior intnetyon against Ploind ff, The dy before the infroction WAS WwrrHen, plaints d£ wete a IZ page Anievane Atyoinsd detordands. Plaintf£ Opfealed He base less Finding of quilt onthe intrection with a 71 page appeal That Hieetened 4p Sue the defendamds . The “page appeal Was rece) Wed by the hearings dopactment on NOV 25 2014, Plaintiff was terminated Fram bis job, by defendants on Nov 16 2014 at the ond of dehendands shift, Supports Facts ly PlointePE witnessed de Fondints being prisented With his 12 PAde, Grievance (by Coordinator MeTarsne ) Swe Ady bebe the bogus infinethon WAS whiten. This ts Me Same,"He still refnsed do sign” infechon which qualifies as Compounding wove. a 2. The office of the hearings officer that Stamped REL Nov ; WS 2014 on i) 7 P45 appenl 1S proximate (within Peet) 4a delordands. They tot lvach “tryether etc, di ly 1 He showed fhem tg Oppel — they ferminetd me /ider frat dag Pe mg ~prrendenih, appen!,