Then report it as a bug. I often get annoyed that sendtoaddress does not allow sending unconfirmed inputs.
On edit:
Is 19VuPF5XHfp435YBMG3f1F3oXZ9BvS2eTe also an address in the same wallet? i.e. did you send your balance from one address you own to another one you owned? If so IIRC bitcoind allows spending that unconfirmed input because it knows that it will be eventually confirmed. Maybe that behavior should be changed? Still I would ask WTF did you do that if it is the case?
No. 19VuPF5XHfp435YBMG3f1F3oXZ9BvS2eTe is not in the wallet. You seem to be under the erroneous impression that some sort of black-art has been attempted with Bitcoin daemon that's gone awry. I'm telling you now that the only command that has been fired at BitcoinD to make it spend the Bitcoins is "sendtoaddress".
Like I said file a bug report. Not sure how or why bitcoind allow spending an unconfirmed output. I use it for my automated backend and I have to drop to a lower level command to force a tx when I have funds but they are unconfirmed and I need it to go out immediately. I actually wish sendtoaddress had a [minconf=1] option with a default of 1 that would allow finer control but it doesn't.