The Tribune

By RASHAD ROLLE

Tribune Senior Reporter

rrolle@tribunemedia.net

EMPLOYEES of Peter Nygard allegedly deleted thousands of files from company computers as the FBI raided the fashion mogul’s New York office and California home.

Lawyers representing 46 women who accuse Nygard of raping them made this allegation in court documents filed on Monday.

Lawyers alleged the plaintiffs were tipped off from former employees that Nygard’s executives ordered employees to destroy computer files and “clean up” records.

The court document says: “Upon receiving this information, plaintiffs immediately sent defendants’ counsel a preservation letter, identifying that they received information that defendants’ employees were instructed to spoliate evidence contained on computer storage devices, and requested ‘immediate measures taken to cease the destruction, explain what measures you took to prevent the destruction of documents, and ensure the full preservation of evidence moving forward.’

“On February 26, 2020, defendants’ counsel responded, indicating they were ‘making appropriate inquiries,’ but failing to identify the steps they were taking to ensure the preservation of evidence. In response, plaintiffs again requested that defendants identify the steps taken to investigate and prevent the continued destruction of evidence. Plaintiffs also sent an addendum preservation letter identifying additional categories of evidence defendants were obligated to preserve. Again, defendants’ counsel responded ensuring they had taken appropriate steps to preserve evidence, but refusing to identify what steps were taken.

“Plaintiffs then requested that defendants’ counsel advise as to what date the litigation hold in this case was issued. Plaintiffs later learned why defendants counsel concealed the truth and evaded plaintiffs’ repeated inquiries regarding the litigation hold.

“On March 11, 2020, the Winnipeg Free Press published an article stating that defendants did not take appropriate measures, but rather, only issued a litigation hold on February 26, 2020—over a year after they ‘predicted’ plaintiffs’ lawsuit, 13 days after the complaint was filed, one day after a Grand Jury subpoena was issued by the federal government, and one day after plaintiffs notified defendants that they were aware of their destruction of evidence.

“It is clear from the timing of the litigation hold alone that defendants and their counsel did not comply with their good faith obligation to ensure the preservation of evidence, despite their representations to the contrary. It is also clear that defendants’ counsel took extreme measures to conceal the truth, thus necessitating this motion.”

On March 18, the Richter Advisory Group was appointed as receiver of Mr Nygard’s company.

On April 27, Richter, in its first supplementary report as receiver, concluded that 10,488 files were deleted after the litigation hold was issued.

Court documents say: “Two of the users were IT accounts—the very group of individuals plaintiffs previously identified as being instructed to destroy evidence. The third user was Greg Fenske —identified in plaintiffs’ first amended complaint as one of the main co-conspirators who has knowingly enabled and facilitated Nygard’s crimes—who deleted a total of 1,059 files on March 18, 2020, the exact date that the receiver was appointed and defendants lost control over their computer systems; and nearly a month after defence counsel took appropriate steps to preserve evidence.’ Richter explicitly notes the suspicious nature of Fenske’s conduct, stating that in the three weeks prior to the appointment of Richter as receiver, he had very little deletion activity. Richter is continuing to investigate the appropriateness of the data/document deletions in light of the litigation hold and the Grand Jury Subpoena. Defendants’ counsel, to this day, has concealed this from Plaintiffs’ counsel. Any notion that the deletion of this evidence was somehow routine or benign is undermined by the Richter Report itself as well as Defendants’ well-documented history of litigation misconduct and disrespect of the judicial system.”

Nygard has denied the rape accusations and claim they are part of a conspiracy against him.