Yes, we are catching this as the means of discovering this particular scenario. Because it is a child under a parent that has already been removed, we don't need to include an event for it. However, on line 944 below the key does still go into the `removedNodes` set, which is then used to remove nodes from the indexes. IOW, we skip only the creation of the remove event (for a node that we don't normally generate an event for anyway).