Legal Question in Sexual Harassment in California

Your question seems to be missing a connection. I can only guess that what you mean is that they told you the burden of proof, told you that it could not be MET, and they are closing your case. That would make perfect sense. Clear and convincing evidence is a very high burden of proof to meet. It is just one step down from the criminal law standard of "beyond a reasonable doubt." The evidence must also be admissible in court. So hearsay and other evidence rules will prevent the chief trial counsel's office from using certain evidence that might exist. Bottom line: it sounds to me like they determined that a prosecution would fail due to the high burden of proof, and decided to close the case. If you are still within the statute of limitations, you may wish to consult an attorney about filing a malpractice case. The burden of proof is still on you, but the standard is much lower - only "preponderance of the evidence," which roughly translates as "more likely than not" that the defendant is liable.