Not as damning as it's made out to be
In context the Lindholm e-mail was from an Engineer to the Head of Google and only a draft at that. This was in 2010 way after Android had been developed and had enormous praise from Sun for the promotion of the Java Programming Language.
It was when Oracle came knocking on the door after they bought Sun and demanded large amounts of money or face litigation.
Under these circumstances when litigation is going to cost a lot of time and money and keep you away from your business priorities it would be prudent to do risk management and ask for options to avoid any sort of litigation. These would be some options that could be looked at. Notice there are no other e-mail conversation regarding this.
This e-mail isn't coming from a lawyer who has looked at the litigation and claims thoroughly and decided they have no case to answer and therefore must license (a VM they don't actually use) - if it was then they probably wouldn't now be in court.
The other e-mail actually makes sense to Google's case which is that they approached Sun and other's for a technology partnership but didn't go ahead and in the end used the Apache Libraries.
However as this will be a jury case it is easy to see how these can be presented extremely negatively by BSF and that is the reason for the attempts to supress them. However Google didn't have much of a case on that one, really.
This is one of the few attacks that would show willful infringement as there are no other documents that show it and willful infringement is what Oracle desperately need to make anything like a fraction of their damage claims stick (and also make an injunction on Android likely).
The damages meanwhile have been thrown out of court twice for being fanciful and trying the judge's patience. In his words "...Instead, I get a report that calls for 6 billion, not million, billion dollars. You are never going to do it again...."