Apart from the bereaved families and friends, so do other people who weren't involved.
From the BBC article:
In a statement Sue and Phil Grimstone, whose son Matthew died in the crash, said: "There seems to be no justice for our son Matthew and all 11 men who died in such tragic circumstances.
"Why are we allowing any form of aerobatics to be performed when there is now doubt concerning any pilot's ability to avoid becoming cognitively impaired from the normal G forces that will be experienced during an aerobatic display?
"Matthew had no interest in air shows, he could not have cared less. Knowing he died because an aircraft was being flown for fun, for the entertainment of others makes it even harder to bear."
That middle paragraph is a pertinent question, after the defence as presented.
Depending on how future policy and practice responds to that rhetorical point, one person's successful legal defence may arguably have damaged plenty of other aviators.
I have no interest in golf, why are we allowing any form of golf games to be conducted in this country, I could get hit by a 100mph golf ball while passing one of these dangerous courses, I think all golf courses should closed and all forms of golf should be banned immediately.