would that convince a judge to instruct a jury to disregard that?
I doubt a judge would make that decision unless the data was somehow "poisoned" and can't be brought to trial.
Most likely the prosecution would bring it up, the defense would counter and it would be up to the jury to decide how relevant it is.
Saying "we strive for a harassment-free workplace, but didn't both to check the data we've been collecting for the past 5 years" wouldn't fly very well with a jury.
Many collect evidence for something after the fact. "We don't look at the data unless something has come up, because it would be a privacy violation otherwise". Which is pretty much how police is supposed to work in normal life either way.
That is still violating privacy laws in EU, potentially. You cannot even give a blanket agreement for "work related" because that does not hold under scrutiny due to simple employee mistakes. You would be collecting more data than agreed upon.
I doubt a judge would make that decision unless the data was somehow "poisoned" and can't be brought to trial.
Most likely the prosecution would bring it up, the defense would counter and it would be up to the jury to decide how relevant it is.
Saying "we strive for a harassment-free workplace, but didn't both to check the data we've been collecting for the past 5 years" wouldn't fly very well with a jury.