This is the kind of logic that programmer types often apply erroneously to the legal system. The answer to your question of how one would determine is the same

This is the kind of logic that programmer types often apply erroneously to the legal system. The answer to your question of how one would determine is the same as it generally is: humans would examine the available admissible information and draw a conclusion based on the preponderance of the evidence. A huge difference between the two rules-based systems is that the legal system contains judges and juries, who routinely can and do just jump into the middle of a situation such as you describe and declare that's not what the rules meant. Which seems like a good context with which to view this case. Many here are saying "well in this case it was deliberate but what if..." while others point out that noting the actions of the defendant as deliberate and purposeful is not an observation that's exogenous to the system.