I'm curious what the story is behind the (apparent, not impossible that 'investor' is the explanation for other, more successful, irregular acquisitions) sharp change of course from very white collar and relatively low legal exposure probably-should-be-crime like crypto hedge funds and grifting Kentucky about blockchain to just outright kidnapping and torturing a guy.
It's not as though I'd expect them to be too decent for it; just that the amount of legal risk involved in blue collar violent crime is normally way higher than that of a few speculative financial shenanigans, which makes doing the financial shenanigans significantly preferable to risking a violent felony record.
Was this the sort of 'falling out over money' where it's really, really personal? Did someone's heavily leveraged house of cards need a quick injection of liquidity really, really, badly? Just plain hubris or risk-insensitivity?
