Look, I didn't even agree with the SF after I found out about it. However, I give the witnesses props for taking action. There was provably a problem, as we're seeing now, and they did what they thought would work.
The laws they believed they were following weren't followed by @justinsunsteemit, and there is a point beyond which actions can't be predicted. Criminal acts by multiple exchanges does come under that shield IMHO.
The witnesses didn't steal the money, and didn't expect exchanges to steal their clients money, but that's what the exchanges did, albeit they might return ownership of those tokens to their owners.
The witnesses not predicting that criminal act is completely understandable.