We've entered a loop here, because you're referring to something they could have done differently at the beginning, but we had been discussing the situation that had been created by them going through the process they way they actually did.
Yes, this could have been avoided by following Apple's procedures correctly. But given that we didn't do that, this story has highlighted a case where we can be prevented from using our device despite not having committed a crime.
There are presumably other cases where a similar could occur:
1) A mistake during the setup process. What if I enter the wrong birth date in error.
2) Death of device owner. What if the person who inherits it doesn't know the answers chosen.
I'm sure plenty of other cases exist.
Not being able to factory reset a device that you have in your physical possession is not reasonable, in my opinion.
Not being able to factory reset a device that you have in your physical possession is not reasonable, in my opinion
You have a car parked outside your house. You have no keys and no paperwork proving ownership, nor is there a record of you in any central repository. Should you be able to just claim it by virtue of physical proximity? I think most people and most legal systems would say no.
For which you would use the security questions that they avoided doing for spurious reasons...