The labyrinthine claim/guess: I dont see the contradiction as a theory, as it goes down to a matter of trust. Shares/assets can and are in reality often held in other people's names - between members of a family, for example. Obviously the people we are talking about are very close, they're not casual business acquaintances.
It is a difference of opinion based on two sources of knowledge. I accept that you are dealing in empirically verifiable data concerning accounts and that you deploy company law to effect. On the other hand, I deploy knowledge of the history over the struggle of Everton's ownership and the dishonest and covert manner that was carried out, the likelihood of a man without the wherewithal to stay in control staying in control for 16 years, his known associates and their own public utterances of their connection to Kenwright (and his own acceptance of their informal involvement with him and the club), and the recent attempts to push the club down a route that no free-to-operate Evertonian chairman/largest share holder would wish to push the club.
It's all happened now. My concern is that if/when there is a change in circumstance at the club that there will be no clean break from what's gone on. That's my only concern. And for the reasons I set out I do think there's going to be no simple transference of ownership.