I think we're reading too much into the words/actions of a petty criminal. I imagine he's lying and was just stealing packages, or at the very least hadn't thought things through properly.
> Seems like a poorly designed incentive on Amazon's part is enough to establish reasonable doubt.
Yes, but a mere claim by the accused that the policy exists with no supporting evidence of the policy is not the same thing as “a poorly designed incentive on Amazon's part”.