no doubt cant argue against ink.but isnt the respo

no doubt cant argue against ink.but isnt the responsibility of the judge to pass fair judgement? so if Veal can prove note holders have already recieved ample compensation and can clearly be shown that greed is playing a factor to extort the company using the note as leverage then the judge may have to rule in fairness towards towards Veal.Afterall he is the one willing to cooperate and im sure the amt in question exceeds the value of the note. the judge has to see both parties claim and judge accordingly. Veals no dummy.with that being said and toxic loans and lenders are involved veal is the good guy. its not just the note and contract here. there is evidence of corruption. no judge would stand for a that and further remove the opp hjoe has created for the economy. there is a bigger picture here.