The suspicion may well have been there for some time, with or without input from anyone. Proving it takes time. While some may have wished PTSC to act before all the necessay evidence had been compiled to make a viable case going forward, there are others, me included, who welcome the fact that PTSC took its time before filing suit.

There will be a prevailing misconception that this is all about PTSC, but even a cursory read of the PRs, between the lines, between those lines, or just as written, will show that TPL/Alliacense are the alleged wrongdoers.

It is not about who at PTSC agreed to, confirmed, or accepted the accounts given, but how TPL/Alliacense "constructed" those accounts for PTSC. One has to note that it is TPL who has been allowed to redact i.e. look in greater detail at incriminating evidence against themselves.

On this basis, "Discovery" will not be the catch-all as "interestingly" proposed, and could quite easily shift from the civil into the criminal arena dependent on the facts disclosed.

In this atmosphere of "glasnost", is it surprising that even more is not demanded other than the minutiae of Pacers and PTO Transaction histories?

.

.

.

Be well