I don't follow your reaction or understand your question really.
I'm just speculating on why those lines are in the book.
Well, you also said that you think that the scene exists, despite also saying that the one in question is probably not it, and despite having no idea what it is. In implying what you think is probably true by alluding to Occam's Razor, you did more than merely speculate.
The purpose of Occam's Razor is to assign weight, as to which explanation among alternatives is in fact more likely, so it's more than a little disingenuous to say that you aren't offering evidence, while at the same time saying however that Occam's Razor would say thus-and-so. Ttrying to have it both ways was the problem I had with what you were saying.
Moreover, based on what you said, I don't see any reason whatsoever to suppose that the scene exists. Occam's Razor applied in that instance doesn't
yield the result you suggest, since your list of simpler possible explanations for the error (which certainly exists, at least in the name of the actor) isn't complete.
The only thing that would make me believe that such a scene exists is actually naming it (and citing evidence).