If you must assume sure. My point was to not assume. If you need to know the intentions of the actor to make a decision,keep in mind assuming and knowing are ve

If you must assume sure. My point was to not assume. If you need to know the intentions of the actor to make a decision,keep in mind assuming and knowing are very different. Especially in cases like this where we know so little about the individuals involved,I believe it's better to just say "Scenario X is statistically likely but we should probe for more facts". Of course this specific case is not important to most people,but my point was regarding the accuracy of probability as more unsolved variables as well as yet unknown variables increase. If we knew specific individuals or had some track record behind the specific organization, I say logic like "Hanlon's razor" can be evaluated usefully. If this was a more controversial case (think rodney king murder trial),it would have been more interesting. Since after all, an action is not a crime without criminal intent. Whether malice,negligence or incompetence assumptions can have an adverse impact on all involved parties.