That, in addition to the 10 repeated, willful and reckless conduct of Cowan et al warrants maximum punitive damages.
The problem with that statement is that damages and punitive damages are the responsibility of the judge and the jury, not TAUG's paid consultant and shadow director. What the paid consultant thinks is totally inconsequential no matter how many times the paid consultant's followers enjoy reading these musings, and, despite the puppet web site, the letters to the judge and the NJ Board of Accountancy it is still up to the judge and the jury, especially the judge who will give instructions to the jury. This will, IMO, not be good for TAUG.
What the TAUG paid consultant is doing is attempting to game the system and that does not help TAUG. The problem is that Seth Shaw, who must know the damage being caused by the paid consultant, either agrees with the tactics and antics of the paid consultant, or is too weak to do anything about it. Either way, we as shareholders will pay the price.
The discounting of the TAUG "win" in court has already been going on for several months. And the whistle blowers no doubt will tell a story of intrigue of an attempt by TAUG CEO and the paid consultant to attempt to legally extort money from Cowan. And that will be crushing. TAUG's case is and was a run of the mill malpractice case between a client and a professional corporation. You know how you can tell? No other company has come along to allege the same things against Cowan. Certainly Cowan had other clients that were damaged by the Meyler error both directly (same reason as TAUG), and indirectly (damage caused by proximity to the blast). But I guess not. That in itself isolates TAUG, and the 67 year old judge who has seen it all has long known this, and besides the TAUG paid consultant and his followers ain't that smart.
All IMO.
