That's weird.
This guy is going to pay over double what he stole. I thought the deal on Wall Street was to only pay at most 10% of the loot in fines and don't have to admit or deny guilt and then move on to planning the next heist.
He should have worked for a bigger firm where the rules are a little different.
So, back to WAMU. I was listening for the umpteenth time to one of the audio clips where an attorney for one of the SNHs was talking about how they did no harm to the estate even if IT was proven and in fact always pushed for a greater return. For the longest time I almost believed him. Then it struck me today - Isn't that what happens anyway in most IT cases? An insider is pushing for better outcomes for his company, but trading on that information (pending merger, etc.). He really does no harm to his company, just profiting off the market. These guys should have been prosecuted as well as equitable disallowance. I still hope the honorable MW tells the debtors that IT cannot be bargained away - that it must be dealt with and severely (just like she has final say on federal interest rate rather than contract rate - they can argue but it is her call - IT should be the same as it is criminal).
I really, truly give up trying to figure this stuff out. You can't make this stuff up - no one would believe you. Reality is truly stranger than fiction.
Good luck all.
AIMHO