Vitt questions whether bounty evidence has been “falsified or tampered with”

One of my biggest problems with some of the NFL's supposed evidence is that they re-wrote or re-typed some of the documentation. I'm sorry but if you have proof why in God's name would you re-do any of it. Just show the original, condeming piece of evidence and be done with it. This just blows my mind.

I'm no lawyer so I'm curious if in a court-of-law, if something similar was presented, would it stand as circumstantial evidence? Or would the original have to be presented to be considered?