That is true, but I find this to be morally offensive. If we have a capability to profit by either creating something new (such as making a tech startup to introduce technology from our kingdom, or sell Cyberdevil services), or by doing hedge fund management, I think the moral obligation is to be productive and actually make something.
You're not wrong, but I'd contend there are moral ways to operate on the stock market, some of which are of considerable value to society, it's just that most people don't do it because being predatory is easier.
Take my example about the 2008 crisis; we could make really good money and save the homes/finances of thousand - or even hundreds of thousands if we do really well - of people. Just not being an asshole would be a dramatic improvement, and actually being nice would be outstanding.
There's also the potential for ongoing stuff. Just having our "machine learning prediction system" post warnings on crisis publicly and highlight companies/industries at risk for various forms of financial manipulation like shorts we could do a lot of good. The whole thing with triple A grade mortgage bundles was obvious to anyone reading all the data, so if we wanted we could potentially soften that crisis in addition to managing it after the fact to recycle an example.
Our cyber devils should be hilariously more effective at this than humans or mid 2000s stock software, and nothing about this would be illegal, so stopping us would be difficult. As a result we should be able to catch all kinds of things, including illegal ones.
How fun would it be to build a rep for our predictions, then arrange with the SEC to sell them 100% legal narc reports based on our ridiculous data analysis ability of the market as a whole?
We could do real good, become the most hated name on Wall Street, beloved name on Main Street, and get paid going both ways for the privilege.
1)Because Craft is a Key ability, we dont have unintentional flaws in our diamonds or manufacturing errors in our cars. We have no reasonable reason to expect unintended byproducts in a transmutation procedure other than what we meant to produce.
If we use TTC to burn something it still creates smoke. The fundamental mechanism here is still mundane even if the tools are magically delicious. To step up or down the chain by definition involves the things created doing so.
3)Isotopically pure elements are within the expected density, conductivity et al of an element. And in a world where major companies dealt in blood diamonds and a significant percentage of global coltan production was mined in the DRC and essentially stolen by Uganda,Rwanda and Burundi with everyone else turning a blind eye, nobody is going to give a shit about the provenance.
Debatable, the weirder it looks the more questions we'll likely get. The people who buy without question aren't likely to have sophisticated equipment to check, so irregularities are more likely to just get bounced.
So,
1) Leaving them alive means leaving enemies alive, who, presumably, can act against us, even from behind bars
2) Getting them into prison requires active action and conflict against White Court.
I want to argue that both of these arguments are flawed. So, let's go.
If we turn the conspirators human, this is not something that can be reverted by means that White Court has. Red Court can turn them, yes, as could Black Court in principle, but not White Court. Whamps are born, not made. By becoming human, they are suddenly mortal, with normal mortal lifespans, and without any of the powers they were accustomed to. Not only that, but one has to remember that this would be done in a middle of a White Court gathering, with the blessings of White Queen. This wouldn't be some manner of unsanctioned action against White Court. What does this mean? This mean that the perpertrators' ability to act against us would instantly become negligible. The only thing they would be left with would be knowledge they have, and that knowledge would be unguarded against their former court members.
The sequence I propose is:
1) Subdue the perpetrators
2) Exorcise them, turning them mortal
3) Get them interrogated by Lara, stripped of all their secrets and hidden wealth (which would go in part to Lara and in part to us / Order of Cauldron as recompense)
4) Either give them a choice of being left with Lara (and executed), or confessing to crimes that won't affect White Court and thrown into a supermax, or directly decide what happens to who (those too dangerous even in this state to let live would be killed, others left to prison).
Why do this at all?
1) To demonstrate the capability. It should be both very scary for the whampires to think that they can lose their hunger, and it also gives them a non-lethal option to deal with their unruly members / criminals. It's very scary because it's a new kind of fear that deals with corruption and destruction of who they are, and it's also a useful option politically, making us a valued asset. Some of the whampires at some point might even want to do it to themselves.
2) To give criminal justice system at least something. Yes, this is, at most, a minor consideration to most, but I want to believe in the system
3) To preserve the perpetrators as further sources of intelligence as needed.
The potential revenge counter-argument is, at best, arguable. The perpetrators themselves would be stripped of assets and power, left aimless and essentially crippled. We should expect revenge, or at least a grudge, from their relatives and allies. By murdering Skavis heir we make enemies of the Skavis. By sparing him, at least in a way, we might lessen that grudge.
1) Scaring them like this isn't exactly worth much. Fear doesn't always have a consistent response, and terrifying them could complicate working with select members later.
It's also a data point about our abilities that we don't necessarily want to broadcast. SCE is currently partially out there, but not to people who share for free. Broadcasting what we can do with the full implications and partial mechanical details isn't a negligible cost.
Without a specific tangible goal that provides a measurable benefit equal to the potential complications this is more a hazy idea than a worthwhile effort.
2) This isn't a gimme to the justice system, it's an insult to it that actively undermines it. The fundamental premise of the whole thing is to reveal the truth and give just punishments based on it before the public.
Being a criminal doesn't mean you should be charged with just any crime so that they get some punishment.
There's also the whole process we'd have to do through to fake an appropriate crime, which is itself illegal and harmful to the system because it damages the systems meant to stop that sort of thing.
It may seem laughable to argue that and for an extralegal execution, but the guy's crime isn't something the system can handle. If you're going to argue for a change on the basis of ethics then it shouldn't be to turn one unjust action into two. Three of you count trading murder for cruel and unusual extrajudicial crippling.
3) Ghosts, the crown, any of their properties, we have plenty of options here. Leaving them alive offers some additional access, but it also makes it possible for others to get at them as well.
I also don't see how you can argue turning a skavis mortal to horrify and terrify the court would also lessen the grudge compared to killing him. The whole point would be to introduce a new visceral sort of fear.