You're clearly biased towards AMC... so you're taking things as fact that can't possibly be proven as fact.
As I understand things... Dish deleted some emails, Voom says those were important evidence that Dish destroyed... Dish says no, they are not, and that they were accidentally deleted by an automated process and they had no reason to save them.
The judge ruled that Dish "should have known" to save them, and as such is issuing instruction to the jury that Dish has been ruled to have destroyed evidence.
Those are the facts as I know them pertaining to the case.
HOWEVER... in terms of the real-world... since Dish destroyed the emails, and admits to doing so... and Voom apparently does not have copies of these emails... it is pure conjecture as to what they may or may not have contained relevant to the case! So... we don't know if Dish truly destroyed any evidence or not, there is no way to know this factually.
Hence... the judge made a ruling relevant to the court case... but it in no way means factually that Dish actually destroyed evidence.
I'll try to find the more detailed info links and post them (in an airport right now.)
If you've ever been involved in a big lawsuit between a couple of companies (I have, more than once) you will find that you get a notice from the lawyers to "freeze" and protect a range of files, emails, etc. when there is the potential of a lawsuit. All automatic deletions are turned off on those, and the backups that large companies keep are also then gathered. One reason that companies have Records Retention rules is to ensure files and records are kept for defined periods of time due to just such occurrences.
In this case, a range of specific emails that were supposed to have been kept and produced were deleted. They clearly should not have been deleted. The State Supreme Court judge has handled many of these types of cases, and has ruled in favor of Dish on a number of issues in this case.
The other part, that you did not address, is the recent refusal of the attorneys to turn over the documents the judge has ordered them to turn over. He has made the order more than once, and the attorneys have simply refused to turn them over. Some of them are subscriber numbers that are being challenged and core to the case.
I have no bias in this case, as I don't know facts beyond what is being disclosed in court. If the other side had been doing what Dish was doing, I would have posted that it looks bad for them and good for Dish. But when the judge gets angry at attorneys because they repeatedly refuse to turn over the evidence he has ordered them to turn over, and the response is "Oh, that doesn't mean anything, it could just be the judge doesn't like them" or similar, it sounds like denial. Especially from someone who has gone out of their way to nitpick every comment from the AMC CEO and post everything you could find to show how bad they are.
It is really simpler than you are trying to make it. Dish has twice been admonished by the judge for refusing to turn over evidence, in one case destroying it, in the other refusing repeatedly to turn it over. Unless you just refuse to believe Dish could be in the wrong, the simple analysis is that Dish is holding back evidence.
OJ could be innocent. Jerry Sandusky is still saying he never touched a kid. Hey, that's how our court system works, right? It's not perfect, obviously (I'm currently testifying as an expert in a case in which a homeowner is suing a company over a fire that he is blaming on a paint company, even though he did not follow the label instructions, stuffed oily rags in a hot enclosed corner of his garage, etc. and, while it is amazing to me that this even made it to court, it is pretty impressive how well the judge is handling some complex issues the attorneys are throwing at him.)