David,

Perhaps I can take a little heat off Jim and answer your questions at the same time.

You wrote:

"The question is WHY NOT? It seems to me a full explanation of WHY those questions will not or can not be answered is extremely important."

I gave Jim a small part of the information that he used during his investigation. My information, apparently not verified by one or more involved parties, had to have become what would have to be considered as a viable but unsubstantiated lead. If my information can't be confirmed by the person(s) that I talked to, he certainly can't make that information public, and open himself and the club to litigation.

I'm relatively certain that most or all of the information contained in Jim's ongoing investigation that will not be made public is similar to my example.

Bob