As a prosecutor it would not be acceptable to destroy evidence in a court case simply because it is their job as a prosecutor to convict the defendant that is guilty, so it would not make sense for them to destroy evidence they have on a defendants guilt.  According to Celeste Bacchi, “The attorneys prosecuting the case have the obvious duty to preserve evidence, as do people acting under prosecutorial authority for example (investigators or experts retained by the prosecutor’s office)”(n.page). The only way it would make sense that a prosecutor to tamper with evidence of a defendants guilt is if that prosecutor was bribed or there is a specific connection with the defendant. It still would not be acceptable. It is the responsibility of the prosecutor to protect evidence and use it accordingly. Tampering with evidence also is a compromise within the vertical and horizontal component with God and society. Proverbs 28:13 Whoever conceals his transgressions will not prosper, but he who confesses and forsakes them will obtain mercy. According to Rich Deem, “We are instructed not to lie, and lying is strongly condemned”(n.page). Destroying evidence to prove guilt is lying and that is unacceptable and prosecutors and defense attorneys should follow the proper vertical and horizontal components that are set before them

In a legal and moral standpoint there are some situations where it should be acceptable for a defense attorney to allow his or her client to be found guilty. According to Michael Asimow and Richard Weisburg, “What should a criminal defense lawyer do when the lawyer is certain when the client is factually guilty (usually because the client has confessed to the lawyer), but the client never the less insists on a strong defense”(p.1) It would not be legally or morally proper for a defense attorney to try to preserve innocence that does not exist. In any situation where the defense attorney knows guilt would give the attorney proper legal and moral right to allow his or her client to be guilty. They would know guilt or innocent based on the clients confession. Proverbs 12:19 says Truthful lips endure forever, but a lying tongue is but for a moment. Why would a defense attorney lie while knowing guilt because it would not last long because the truth always comes out.

In both cases if a prosecutor tries to destroy evidence proving guilt or a defense attorney preserving an innocence that does not exist would hurt the reputation or the criminal justice system. The public would see that the system is twisted in a lie and could not be trusted. If both make the right vertical and horizontal choices with God and society it will preserve the system, and the public would be able to trust the system and it would ultimately prosper. Zechariah 8:16 says These are things that you shall do: Speak the truth to one another; render in your gates judgments that are true and make for peace.

References

Bacchi, C. (2016). Preservation of Evidence in Criminal Cases. Retrieved June 1, 2016, from http://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/preservation-evidence-criminal-cases.html

Deem, R. (2007, November 12). Why Do Christians Lie So Much: Truth and Christianity. Retrieved June 1, 2016, from http://www.godandscience.org/doctrine/truth_and_christianity.html

Asimow, M., & Weisburg, R. (2009). When the Lawyer Knows The Client is Guilty: Client Confessions In Legal Ethics Popular Culture and Literature. 18(229), 230-258. doi:http://www-bcf.usc.edu/~idjlaw/PDF/18-2/18-2 Asimow.pdf