A simple narrative of what has happened without the rambling is:
1/ Unauthorised party takes control of domain name / (website?) and offers it up for sale
2/ Original owner pays $30,000 into escrow for it using a third party buyer and thereby resumes control
3/ Original owner seems to expect to have the $30,000 refunded to her from the escrow service
It is actually an interesting use of the escrow service where she agrees to the terms of the sale, the sale goes through, and she then apparently informs the escrow service that she wants the payment refunded because of a theft prior to the escrow agreement which she was aware of when she entered into the terms of the sale.
This puts the escrow service in a difficult position because the theft or fraud has nothing to do with the escrow service itself but instead is between the parties who agreed to the sale which proceeded as agreed. There was no theft or fraud involved in the actual sale transaction or escrow process itself.
This type of demand could have implications for other escrow services which proceed as agreed but then the buyer demands their payment is refunded because of some theft or fraud committed by the seller prior to the agreement being made and the buyer claiming to be fully aware of this theft or fraud when they entered into the sale agreement.
The OP has summarised this as the original owner "scamming the scammer", but this tactic could also be used to scam an innocent seller using escrow.
