Received Contradicting Evidence For Motion of Discovery

I am being sued for an old credit card debt and have some questions regarding what I received as a response to my motion of discovery, which contradicts the amount they’re suing for and what they’ve previously sent as evidence.

Here’s the scoop, I received my first communication from this CA in February 2009, and had sent them a debt validation letter within the 30 days (through certified mail). On March 4, 2010, I received a statement from 12/2003 that they claimed was validation of debt owed. Two days later, I was served the summons and complaint. The amount they’re suing for is the EXACT amount listed on the 12/2003 statement (to the penny).

Today, in their response to my motion of discovery, I received a completely different statement, this one dated 11/2004, which shows payment activity being conducted. The last statement I’ve received from anyone was actually in May 2003, so I wasn’t sure when the last payment was applied.

Up until now, I had every reason to believe that this account was out of SOL (6 years in my state), but this statement defeats my SOL defense. It does, however, potentially present a couple of new possible defenses, but I need clarification first.

One thing I found interesting is that the 2004 statement was printed on February 17, 2010 – more than 2 weeks before they had sent me the 2003 statement as debt validation. This clearly means that they had the 2004 statement in their possession at the time they sent what they claimed was debt validation, and at the time of filing, but chose to use the 2003 statement instead, probably because the amount is considerably higher on the 2003 statement after having made payments in 2004.

My questions are:

1. Would this be considered as misrepresentation of the amount owed, since they have now sent me 2 different statements (each a year apart) with significantly different amounts listed? There is more than a $1,000 difference between the two statements, and it’s obvious that the amount they're trying to sue for isn't even accurate.

2. Since the CA is using the amount from the 2003 statement in their complaint and validation, will the court use the date on that statement or the 2004 statement to determine SOL?

3. Since they had sent an older statement than what they obviously had in their possession as debt validation, can it even be considered as proper validation, or are they now continuing to collect on a debt without providing proper validation (which I requested more than a year before)?