Critical Reasoning

A group of children of various ages was read stories in which people caused harm, some of those people doing so intentionally, and some accidentally. When asked about appropriate punishments for those who had caused harm, the younger children, unlike the older ones, assigned punishments that did not vary according to whether the harm was done intentionally or accidentally. Younger children, then, do not regard people's intentions as relevant to punishment.
Which of the following, if true, would most seriously weaken the conclusion above?

(A) In interpreting these stories, the listeners had to draw on a relatively mature sense of human psychology in order to tell whether harm was produced intentionally or accidentally.
(B) In these stories, the severity of the harm produced was clearly stated.
(C) Younger children are as likely to produce harm unintentionally as are older children.
(D) The older children assigned punishment in a way that closely resembled the way adults had assigned
punishment in a similar experiment.
(E) The younger children assigned punishments that varied according to the severity of the harm done by the agents in the stories.

I'm ok with the OA [spoiler](A)[/spoiler] but I'm not getting how B & E r supporting the conclusion as stated in OG10. Please help in understand

IMO, B & E are sort of closing gaps in the argument by eliminating alternate causes (severity of the harm caused- a factor that children could have used) that could have been the reason for the children to not regard people's intention relevant to punsihment. By eliminating alternate cause/reasons, you strengthen a conclusion.

The conclusion is that younger children don't take intent into account when assigning punishment.

B) states that severity of the harm was clearly stated in the stories the children read. This eliminates an unknown in the argument (maybe the children didn't know how badly the people got hurt), which in turn strengthens the argument

E) states that the younger children recommended a varied series of punishments based on the severity of the action. For example, this implies that someone who intentionally slapped someone might get less of a punishment than someone who accidentally killed someone, even though one intended to harm a person and the other one didn't. Therefore, intent is not taken into account by the young children in this scenario, which again supports the conclusion