Certain circumstances speak to giving rise to a plausible motivation--if the perpetrators see the world in a highly likely manner, whether realistic or not, such that they would predictably act from that motivation.
And yet, no one on this side of heaven can go back in time to read minds, so unless a perp leaves a detectable trail of breadcrumbs, we often can't conclusively claim to know what a perp may have been thinking or organically responding to at the time.
There is sometimes--as is the case with this event--that context supports coming to a particular conclusion about a motivation, inasmuch as the "web" of many, many factors or choices made along the line were done in a manner in line with the assertion of a particular impetus for WHY something was done in a criminal deception event." The more unlikely those choices, the more information-bearing those choices would be.
One can often tell a truly derisible conspiracy theorist by their willingness to stride across such a clairvoyant roadblock using leaps of "blind faith" with nary a care about the pitfalls that could easily lead to errors.
That Fuddy was in her lifetime associated with many false and clandestine--even murderous-events and was owed "thanks" from her "friend" Barry and those in the Obama administration, allows us to see why the designers and authorizer of the hoax would do a swap to let it only appear that Fuddy died.
So are you saying Fuddy is still alive and that the diver dressed like Fuddy was only playing dead.