Haha.. I don't buy into it either. Something is fishy about the story, or maybe this is a secret plea deal with a behind the scenes type negotiation process to trick other conspirators into providing more evidence.
"On February 11, 2011, another trader, Trader E, wrote to Trader C: 'shall we spoof.' Trader C responded: 'sure.'
...
Even the most minimalist 2018-era bank compliance program would at least teach traders not to use the word 'spoof' in a recorded electronic chat, but a decade ago our primitive forebears did not quite understand the problem."
https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2018-01-31/sergeant-...
I'm having trouble buying any other explanation than, "This absurdly overcomplicated workflow introduced by conventional office software not designed to cover its tracks didn't cover its own tracks" as plausible.