I think your wrong in your assumption. If that was the case, WHY has their not been 1 word out of Hanna's mouth as to Ronny's actions and no involvement and the reason why she gave him the boot? Pretty clear Hanna had no choice in the matter and hopefully found out when or IF Ronny discussed any of it with her.
The SEC takes their own sweet time in tracking down manipulative actions in the market place. To say LYJN is not under any microscope would be a false and misleading statement IMHO since ANY and ALL entities involved with those folks WILL be looked at by the SEC.
If 12 months go by and nothing more comes of the original court case then possibly Hanna can start breathing a little easier. Either way, investors won't be hearing 1 word about anything IMHO until they see it 1st hand from the SEC should their have been anything additional going on.
The reason I make the statement is that Hanna was so quick in the " early days " of LYJN to discredit the PUMPERS and MANIPULATORS from the company and threaten to prosecute them. So why would she NOT produce the same type of PR statement to distance herself and LYJN from the underhanded dealings that were going on????
The previous issue apparently blind sided Hanna and was not an " ongoing concern " for several years while Ronny WAS a member of the UPPER mamagement and CEO! Quite a difference IMHO!