Well, actually, he should've been allowed to continue. There's no way they could prove he had any insider information. All he has to say is that he was at his house the whole time. Prosecution would have a hell of a time trying to prove his super-hearing.
Well, technically he isn't guilty of insider trading, since neither does he have fiduciary duty to the public nor is he an insider by SEC definition. So, I suppose justice prevails in this case.