Banning someone on an assumption and no evidence whatsoever is a dangerous precedent. Where does it end? Can anyone now be banned because admin thinks we did something wrong? Watch out for the Thought Police! No evidence needed now. Just a good assumption.
Banning Blink feels like handing him over to appease the angry mob rather than actually ruling fairly on the case. He received funds from the bank, so delete everything purchased with those funds like you did with the others. I see absolutely no logic in banning him because “admin thinks” he talked about it with his brother.