But the player isn't violating OPTAH, only the dealer is. The player might be supposed to table his own hand, but he isn't violating any rule if somebody else tables his hand.

If the player wouldn't have tried to muck and the player next to him (instead of the dealer) would have turned over the cards, nobody here would argue that the hand should be dead and at least most would say that the hand should be considered as tabled at that point. After that, we would warn the other player to never touch another players cards, but that is a totally different issue.

I would, if the dealer had already grabbed them from the player.

No way to know for sure the intent or 'reflex' that caused the Dealer to turn the cards over but ...

1) The player stated 'trips' in their pre-fold monologue which was incorrect. The Dealer felt compelled to correct the mistake.

2) The player was a 'little old lady reg' that probably gets stomped at the table anyway so in there crept an instantaneous bit of compassion.

3) Unlikely that the Dealer really thought that flashing meant tabled, very experienced dealer here who previously was at a table where a BBJ got flashed and mucked to everyone's dismay!

4) Some of the other rules shown don't directly fit into this conversation since they require other conditions ...
3) Incorrectly awarding a pot requires 2 tabled hands ... Our discussion here is trying to determine IF we have 2 tabled hands.
6) Were not sure if any players saw these cards ... The rule doesn't address whether the cards are live or not, only that they be exposed for all to see. (This one is kind of in the Dealer's favor.)
2) Another potential back door to making this a live hand. Management (Floor) decided against it.

It's easy (I do it) to try and find a rule that fits a spot but not always so easy to get through the 'flow chart' of events and be able to apply the rule. GL

yea, I was just trying to find a reason for the dealer to do this other than helping out a reg, which is what it seems to be

We are now playing quantum poker and it is Schrödinger's hand...neither tabled one mucked but also both.

I now believe we have the new record for veered of course.

Btw and not toward you Dinesh, when you revert to it seems obvious after stating you posted a definitive rule, I believe you just successfully rebutted and undermined your own claims.

Only because I didn't bother to preface it with "assume I agree that the rule is intended to mean that the player himself must show his own hand", which I actually don't agree is true, as I said in an earlier post or two.

The Schroedinger-ness of it is exactly why I don't think you can make any ruling other than that the hand is live as soon as dealer tables it. By written rule it explicitly and specifically is not dead.

It's not simply that, though that is part of it.

It's also that in general, killing hands and giving pots to people who don't have the best hand at a showdown should be avoided whenever possible.

There are specific situations where the management has to do it, and that's fine. But in general you want to avoid it, because in general, situations where the best hand wins the showdown are more equitable results than allowing a winning hand to get killed. And that's true even where there are rule violations.