Good point, and I largely agree. With public information, an outsider cannot verify the big picture, especially in such a complex group structure.
Precisely for this reason, I find one point in the timeline particularly interesting: the criminal report filed against Vesa Mäkipää.
Looking back at the whole situation now, it would be interesting to know why things escalated right then, what had happened in the company before that – and what Mäkipää might have learned or brought up before the criminal report was filed.
I don’t mean by this that there was anything inherently wrong with filing a criminal report. But from the perspective of a special audit (erityistarkastus), the timeline would be interesting:
What happened before → what Mäkipää knew or brought up → why the criminal report was filed → what the official authority process ultimately showed → what happened after that.
Here I agree with you:
An outsider can raise questions using public information, but the answers would likely only be found in the original material.