A motion was filed on Monday by the lawyers of Vanessa Bryant that would require jurors to assume that the photos of the crash site involving her husband, Kobe, and daughter, Gianna, were widely shared because all evidence proving so was destroyed.
Bryant has been under severe emotional stress since the passing of her beloved husband and daughter, more-so since having learned that photos of the crash site were shared among deputies and firefighters. Kobe Bryant and daughter Gianna, alongside seven others, tragically died in a helicopter crash in January of 2020. The photos were believed to have been shared by one deputy on his cellphone in a Norwalk bar and by a fire captain at an awards show, who also had the photos on his phone.
The county has been diligent in their attempts to have the case dismissed, but a ruling in favor of the motion could thwart their efforts.
Bryant’s lead attorney Luis Li argued that Sheriff Alex Villanueva ordered all deputies with images of the crash to delete them immediately only after having learned of the bar incident following a citizen complaint filed on January 29th of 2020.
An investigation composed by The Los Angeles Times in March revealed that deputies had shared the photos, but because the county agencies failed to order their employees to keep the photos intact on their devices, their client Vanessa Bryant was unable to identify who had possession of the images as their devices were wiped clean. Attorneys for the county, however, did acknowledge that deputies and three fire captains had possession, and shared the photos of the crash site.
Attorney for the county Skip Miller, to defend Sheriff Villanueva, argued that the order of immediate deletion of the images was his client’s attempt to keep the promise he made to Vanessa Bryant that the photos wouldn’t be released to the public.
In her deposition, Bryant recalled telling Villanueva: “If you can’t bring my husband and baby back, please make sure no one takes photographs of them. Please secure the area.”
Bryant’s lawyers want an “adverse inference” at summary judgement and trial, arguing that lost evidence would have almost certainly shown “further electronic dissemination” of the photos.