I do not understand how the bolded bit is supportable on the facts:
The ATSB also found that the presence of the building struck by the aircraft did not increase the severity of the consequences of this accident. In the absence of that building, the aircraft’s flight path would probably have resulted in an uncontrolled collision with a busy freeway, with the potential for increased ground casualties.
Isn’t the building located on the aerodrome side of the “busy freeway”?