Excellent post and assessment of the situation, thank you. My take away is:
--Mr. Wesson took it upon himself to vette prospective board members even though this was not a requirement of his duties as an independent board member, and he did so in the interests of shareholders.
--The bar was set so high by the letter agreement of May, 2012, he could not find prospective candidates who met those strict criteria, but did find many who were willing to serve on JBI's BOD that came very close to meeting those criteria.
I would only add that:
-- the investor group (or one individual within it) opposed Mr. Wesson's candidates, even though both Mr. Rauber and Mr. Ingham were initially impressed with the qualifications of those candidates, and the group of candidates themselves were impressed with the credentials of one another,
-- Mr. Wesson apparently resigned from the board in April after receiving assurances from the investor group and/or management that they would promptly seat a BOD of their own choosing instead, and
-- Mr. Wesson has reason to believe that their failure to seat a BOD promptly is cause for concern, leading to current calls for a shareholder proxy.
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
