There wasn't any crime, no funds or assets were stolen. Btw, the witnesses are no party to the "contract" you seem to think exists and the witnesses have absolutely zero contractual obligations, heck, the very reason that all of this technology exists is because contractual obligations are as obsolete and meaningless as you seem to think "promises" made by Stinc would be in a court of law. Finally, the maxim of law for you that blows the lid off the crook pot of nonsense you, steemit, and all other such insufferable moronic nonthoughts keep cooking:
Caveat emptor is a neo-Latin phrase meaning "let the buyer beware." It is a principle of contract law in many jurisdictions that places the onus on the buyer to perform due diligence before making a purchase. The term is commonly used in real property transactions but applies to other goods, as well as some services.
I don't think a contract exists. That's the whole point of the piece. In a court of law. Justin would win. And the 50million Eth was stolen. It was exploitation of the chain but in essence it was theft. Save the name calling . It only brings your argument down to a degenerate level. 😉