I understand that they knew data was missing. That

I understand that they knew data was missing. That is exactly the point. I'm not chastising your comment on missing data. I'm making a point that they already knew that data was missing and probably a pretty good knowledge of the extent of it in order to start proceedings and want a high power law firm to get a handle on it. How bad infers it's much worse than they know and that's the point you don't know and can't just throw out there unless your trying to start a string of negativism. Once again, I think we all agree, data was missing/sabotaged, that's not the point. At this point it is what is there and usable and accepted in order to make conclusions and move forward.