Once a legal battle becomes 'irreversible', all of your questions will be fully investigated and answered. That's how the system works. Callesse would be wise to avoid crossing this line. It only gets uglier, ...a lot uglier with no winners.
Personally, I do not agree with you that Callesse is innocent. There's a ton of dirt on him already. They'll be a lot more to dig up. Just based on precedent, Callesse has a long history of deceiving shareholders for his own enrichment. There's no doubt about that. Thinking that this case is just about share ownership denial (taking shares from the innocent) is being immensely naive.
The naked short trades that took place in early July of last year will tell us more of who was funding and advising Callesse. That spotlight will very likely unveil even more dirt.
But despite the obvious detective work that will ensue...
The question one should be asking is why were the judges willing to ignore a legal technicality to avoid ruling on this case. Also, why was this case pushed out for as long as it was when it appeared to be a quick and straightforward ruling. It took the judges months rather than the expected weeks to rule. ...and other cases that came after ours were decided upon prior.
These facts too may be revealing and may tell us something about their true intentions. My guess is that the judges will prolong this case indefinitely to avoid having to set a new precedent for whatever reason that may be important to them. We may never know for sure but their behavior speaks volumes.
Market Data 
Markets 
AI
