For one to perform a conclusion by reading the ~800 pages or so, shows the limitation and perhaps also the intent to derive a certain conclusion. To focus blame and establish a concrete scenario that supports this, is only limited to the content within. When evidence from the outside is presented to the picture, it has the ability to diminish all desired affects one may have had, in placing blame.

The shareholders here are consistent, as am I in my analysis of the properties. Management is inconsistent in their presentations of the properties, of which, at least one inconsistency, defies science. So, who stands a better chance in any just court of law, the consistent one, or the inconsistent one? Elementary......