Hmmm...panties not in bunch...since you didn't specify what you considered to be "random."
I challenge you to a fox-off-the-arm-punching contest.
My argument is not with your judgment on her choice of actions (wouldn't have been my choice either), but with your USE OF THE WORD RANDOM.
In all reality...running back to her car with the fox attached still isn't random. It is one of several realistic choices this woman could have made. You are misusing the word "random" when you should be saying "unlikely" or "unpredictable."
That is all.
For clarity's sake, I'll give you an example of a random action after fox attacks and latches (in this case):
Dress the fox in Victorian period garb, conduct a dramatic interpretation of "The Tempest"~by Shakespeare in 3 acts, then light the fox on fire while building a pinata containing fly larva.
That, once again, would be "random."
Wait, now. By your own stated definition, your example at the end would be "unlikely" or "unpredictable", not random either. Not to mention that your stated definition is flawed.
at random, without definite aim, purpose, method, or adherence to a prior arrangement; in a haphazard way: Contestants were chosen at random from the studio audience.
So in theory, if she ran back to her car with a definite aim or purpose it would not be random. But if she ran haphazardly, with no purpose or aim it would be random. If she did the shakespeare fire larva thing with an intent in mind it would not be random, if it was done for no particular reason it would be random.
Though like you did state, the fact that the fox bit her would not be random by the view that under the circumstances a fox could be expected to act that way... though it could be considered random with the opinion that in a normal course of walking through the woods, you do not get bit with a rabid fox (at least not in my experience).