There's a ton of padding in this article to be honest; the tl;dr is that the guy that found it revealed his identity because of impending lawsuits, notably one who claimed her text messages and e-mails were hacked to spy on her ideas of where the treasure might be.<p>The rest of the article is just a ton of fluff, repeats, and padding. I for one would just like to know where the treasure was located in the end (and I don't understand why it's not just revealed, given that there's no treasure there anymore), and what was in it. Don't really care about who found it.