Hiding evidence & the truth vs. recanting & recalling (2nd Try)

The Family now states that they have "recalled" literature that caused problems. The idea they are selling is they are now a new and improved Family International, a loose collection of independant Christian missionaries.

We know all that is bull.

We as ex-members know the truth about TF, that it cleaned out its literature and videos in order to hide evidence of its true beliefs and practices, and to offset criminal prosecution. We know how what they believe on the inside is so different from what they show the world when trying to win converts. We know that they do not take much if any responsibility for what they taught, knew was practiced, for crimes committed, and that they downplay culpability by saying "mistakes were made." We know their PR games in getting academics and experts to give them a clean bill of health as people living a healthy alternative lifestyle. We know they have never recanted their beliefs about Jewish conspiracy, certain sexual doctrines, and many other controversial and dangerous beliefs. And let's not even get started on what they were supposed to "renounce" in order to win the custody case but reneged.

There is of course a difference between recalling and recanting, and burying evidence and hiding the truth.

I am looking for evidence in their writings to show this difference, that they were hiding evidence rather than recanting and recalling.

I am also looking for ways to articulate the idea that TF should not use the term "recall" and "recant" when they do not live up to public expectations of what goes together with those words, when companies or institutions use them.

Any tips and ideas?

Can you point me to literature, legal precedents, etc?