Odds are they'll find more. There were scores filed each year. Sometimes a score filed in a month. The first couple presented as "signed" by Romney weren't, but they did find some.
But I'm not sure he'll be in trouble, or lied. He said he had retired from managing Bain, and so far nobody's shown that he didn't: There's just the claim that as CEO he must have been a hands-on manager and be responsible for everything that happened. It's not a logically necessary claim, but it sounds nice. The SEC filings aren't actively managing, however; they're reporting, and as a board member I had to sign a couple of things that I didn't have real control over (except for having had a part in hiring the CEO). "Here are some facts" is a different kind of thing from saying, "Joe, hire this person, fire these 3, and let's buy this company."
He went back for board meetings, but boards don't actively manage the day-to-day affairs of a company. At least not most. In most cases there's a clear line of authority--the board delegates authority to the CEO and management and receives reports and makes some high-level policy decisions. But somebody should look at the minutes for the years in question, because in Romney's case he was the board and also the CEO. The limits that Romney-as-board wouldn't be able to compellingly overstep Romney-as-CEO wouldn't even have to step over. Then again, such minutes tend to report only what the corporation and the board want to report. They don't have to be verbatim or even dreadfully complete to cover all the legal bases.
The Olympics contract's conflict of interest provisions said he couldn't have any interests in companies that contracted with the Olympics. So far that's an open question--Bain did, but if he was a hands-off CEO (and, yes, they happen, for a variety of reasons) then the only companies at issue are those that Romney was on the boards of. Did any of them have Olympic contracts? Dunno. But I'm sure that if they did in more than trivial, tangential ways we'll soon hear about it. (Surprised we haven't already, to be honest. The longer we hear nothing, the more likely the claim is vacuous.)
One could argue that as the shareholder of Bain he had some interest in all sorts of companies, but if that was covered then the Olympic contract would also disallow most mutual funds and all sorts of other composite investments in which the investor's interests are mediated by layers of management. That's hair splitting.
= new reply since forum marked as read
