EBS - reached my 3 max quota yesterday, and this is #2 for today... you do pose good questions that also reflect the concerns of many.
In short - I don't know what actually happened in Fargo, outside of the (slim) publicly disclosed information. But here's how I interpret it:
Thinking of the legal ramifications of messing with a clinical trial - the assertion of what took place, and potential weight a 'guilty' verdict carries, is incredible. These are people's lives that were played with - in volumes. If folks were actually prevented from getting their intended dosing of Bavi, which for some (statistically shown) has prolonged lives significantly, it is the equivalent of mass murder. In addition, it could have possibly resulted in a delay of a life saving product (if proven to work as expected) to the market - driving the potential survival rates of cancer patients down through exclusion of the product from the market place.
If I'm in a trial with this type of burden (plaintiff or defendant) - I am under some of the most severe restrictions and gag orders one can have.
As a plaintiff - if I disclose too much, its the equivalent of publically blaming a company that will have immediate affect on its business. Present and future. One can not say much until judges and lawyers work their brew and product a final outcome. Peregrine, I am sure, is handed over a menu of words and phrases they can use and are warned not to get off the reservation. Wrong twist of the tongue can turn a win for the company to a loss + defamation lawsuit.
As a defendant - I am going to stay quiet and also follow the script. This is where the 'everything you say can and will be used against you' aspect comes in. I'd try to close this through agreements and insurance, and keep information from getting out.
Which brings the thoughts of how can this close and will we know more? This is purely a play scenario... but we can hear in two months that the case is closed, parties are satisfied, undisclosed sums have been exchanged, and no more information is available. Ever. It will be frustrating - but that is how many legal cases of this magnitude and impact end up.
Will it be that way? I don't have a clue. Neither do any of the folks who are outside the circle of participation in that activity.
Regarding Breast Cancer results, etc. - yes, it bothers me. But I also put a lens of corporate maturity and capacity on it - giving me a sense they try to juggle things the best way they know/are advised. I am not condoning this action, but not criticizing either.
For a company to be around for that long and somehow make it with relatively low liability in terms of losses is actually an impressive feat. That, however, comes at a price of slow progress and single threading. Added to the fact that bio/pharma research is so difficult and failure prone - its a game for the ultra patient and flat lined. Anyone with a pulse gets angered, upset, disappointed and generally dissatisfied at one point or another. Some of it for a good reason, some of it for lack of understanding of how difficult, costly and unlikely to succeed getting a working product is in this field.
My original post was not meant to attack you or your intent. I don't know you and, based on that, have to start with the notion that you are well intended and caring for a good outcome for patients and investors. It was meant to highlight the impact that any action can have, once taken from a board-level table tennis and into the big leagues where accusations can produce incredibly painful and long lasting results.
BTW - I an a 'Newbie' on the contribution side - but have followed the messages on this board for almost as long as I own the stock.
Best of luck and outcomes to all involved.
MH
Market Data 
Markets 
AI
