ALBUQUERQUE (LN) — A federal magistrate judge denied a motion for default judgment as a sanction for spoliation of evidence in a civil rights lawsuit brought on behalf of a minor student who alleged he was sexually assaulted at a New Mexico elementary school.
Sara Crecca, as guardian ad litem for M.K., sued Quemado Independent Schools, alleging the district failed to follow the student’s Individualized Education Program, which left him unsupervised and vulnerable to sexual victimization by another student.
In her motion, Crecca accused the district of fabricating evidence by creating a timeline of events and witness statements after receiving notice of legal claims, and of coordinating witness testimony through a pre-deposition meeting.
Crecca argued that Principal Cindy Orthman created a timeline on January 18, 2022, after receiving a notice of legal claims in January 2022, and that the district later asked teachers to provide written statements long after the incidents occurred.
The suit further alleged that district employees held a meeting on September 4, 2025, to review documents and refresh memories before their depositions, a move Crecca characterized as an attempt to harmonize testimony.
U.S. Magistrate Judge Jennifer M. Rozzoni denied the motion, finding that Crecca failed to show the district acted in bad faith or fabricated evidence.
Rozzoni wrote that while the timeline and statements were created after the fact, there was no evidence they were inaccurate or that the district attempted to pass them off as contemporaneous records.
"The Court has no reason to believe that any of the witness testimony was fabricated as a result of the September 4th meeting," Rozzoni wrote.
The judge noted that Crecca did not explain what, if any, false testimony resulted, pointing out that deposition excerpts showed witnesses did not insist the student was always escorted, contradicting Crecca's allegations.
Rozzoni distinguished the case from precedents involving forged documents or willful false answers, noting that drafting statements after an incident occurs is not inherently spoliation unless intended to mislead.
"Drafting a statement about an alleged incident after it occurs, whether on the witness’s own volition or of another, does not in and of itself make it fabricated or forged," she wrote.
In a response, the district noted that Superintendent David Lackey had submitted an affidavit stating the district had not been sued since he became superintendent in 2014 and was unaware that holding the meeting without legal counsel could be problematic.
The case remains pending in the U.S. District Court for the District of New Mexico.