I'd be seriously surprised and disappointed if our transactional history (and that of our sponsors) showed anything other than we are squeaky clean, which I guess leads back to witness statements and whether or not you believe there is something meaningful which can be derived from the emails. Putting the CAS judgement to one side, I am not sure how emails could stand up against records of signed off, approved, authorised transactions. This is bread and butter stuff for any auditable industry.
I know there are other charges, but to me, the ones aimed at disguised shareholder funding feels like the most serious set.