If I were a NOKIA shareholder at the moment Elop announced he was killing the best selling smartphone OS on the planet in order to replace it with the worst selling one, especially knowing he was a major shareholder in the company who had produced that failed OS - would I believe he was defrauding me?

Would that belief be compounded if the OS in question had already proven to be a failure for at least three other big manufacturers?

The iPhone had been in the market since 2007 and even in Q4 2010, in terms of units, Symbian was still outselling it by an very large margin.
Samsung were making some very nice Android handsets yet, in terms of units, Symbian was still outselling them by an very large margin too.
On top of that sales in Symbian devices were still increasing and so were their margins.

So, if despite all the evidence to the contrary Elop publicly announced Symbian was a burning platform and he would be replacing it with an OS from his former employer (you know - the one he was a major shareholder of) that was already a proven failure would I have to question his motives?

If I knew that, in terms of revenue, Ovi was bigger than Android Marketplace and in most places outside of North America it was bigger than Apple's app store too and I knew NOKIA had other great offerings like NOKIA maps would I smell a rat when he tried to justify this move by suggesting we needed outside help with our 'ecosystem'?

When I discovered his former employer (you know - the one he was a major shareholder of) was getting control of the app store to cater for all the smartphones we made and our own app store would be sidelined would I be justified in thinking I was getting shafted?

Would I feel far from gaining an 'ecosystem' that it was being taken away from us, complete with our maps, and presented to his former employer (you know - the one he was a major shareholder of)?

If I knew China Mobile, a carrier bigger than all US carriers combined, had publicly expressed support for an advanced open source OS we were working on and were part of the working group helping to develop that OS would I be mortified that Elop announced he was killing that too. Would I view Elop ticking off a very important ally as a beneficial decision for me or just a way of eliminating another competitor to the failed OS from his former employer (did I mention he was a major shareholder?)?

If I knew his former employer (you know...) viewed open source as a 'cancer' might I feel this was an act of sabotage?

If the one device we produced that ran that OS then proved to be hugely desirable but Elop deliberately hamstrung its success by restricting it's markets who would I believe he was working for? For me?

If I then discovered he had transferred thousands of our valuable patents into a third party company and his former employer (...) was going to get a significant cut of our licensing fees even though they had made absolutely no contribution whatsoever in developing the technology could I possibly believe he was acting in my best interest?

I genuinely believe this case has mileage so long as they cite the right evidence, at this moment they seem to be focussing on things he said in Q4 2011 which I think is small potatoes.

Imo the things Elop's done that have damaged NOKIA so badly are not due to incompetence, they have been deliberate decisions made to benefit M$, if that's the case I'd say he clearly has defrauded NOKIA's shareholders.

Just as an aside listen to him speak and see for yourself if he talks about making NOKIA a success or making Windows Phone a success.