State of mind is relevant to punitive damages, which are likely still on the table. Also if he cooperated with discovery to avoid death penalty sanctions there would be a jury trial on liability where his state of mind would again be relevant.
I agree Jones is not a rational actor in many respects, but this discovery abuse has been going on for months if not years, and has likely been documented in detail by the judge to protect the default judgment from appeal. Jones has likely had the consequences of his litigation choices spelled out to him many times by his attorneys and the judge. He may just be in denial (as evidenced by the revolving slate of his attorneys), but there is also evidence he made a considered decision to risk a default rather than hand over the goods.
