Proof that Rambutt acted in bad faith and with prejudice against the defendants was discussed in this trial. In fact, the closing arguments from Nissly hit home on this very nicely.
The Judge decided against including special instruction about spoliation in the jury instructions. He also did not allow for the prior ruling of spoliation (upheld by CAFC) to be included in the trial, which is why there WILL be an appeal, and then spoliation WILL take center stage.
So you see, this case IS about spoliation Nicky#2.