The official investigators who cleared Jones complained that he did not comply with information requests as quickly as they would like. But in the end, that didn't matter, according to statements one official made to The Guardian:
Ultimately this has to be about what they did, not what they said...The honesty and rigour of CRU as scientists are not in doubt ... We have not found any evidence of behaviour that might undermine the conclusions of the IPCC assessments.
The only slap on the wrist came from CRU's controversial 1999 graph for the World Meteorological Organization, the subject of Jones' "trick" science. Because of creative labeling techniques, the decline in temperature decline was hidden. Notations were made "in the report text" explaining the labeling techniques, but that text didn't make it out to the general public, of course. At least the investigators picked up on that.