Aviation is a dangerous business and the professional community around it tries to do everything to make it safer. All the instructors and examiners I know personally, would be emotionally touched by the loss of his/her former student, especially when it's related to the pilot, and would professionally ask themselves, what they could have done more for this pilot to survive or avoid this situation. The same goes for ATC friends: this was apparently a VFR flight, so no responsibility on the controller at all, but it's stil hits the ATCO as well, who dealt with the accident aircraft the last time.
I think there is a tendency in these accidents, that gaining an instrument rating doesn't mean that VFR flight limitations and risks (night) can be pushed or ignored. There is the issue of currency (not in this case though...), then the aircraft capabilities and last but most important, the preparation. The preparation is different for a VFR flight than an IFR flight. Having to switch to instruments on a VFR flight is not a "great save", but an utter planning failure and a last resort in a dire emergency for a situation, that should have been avoided altogether. I have seen too many accident reports, some close to home, where IR pilots ventured on a VFR flight, but taking VFR rules and risk assessments too lightly, assuming that their training will save them, should anything go wrong with flying VFR. Quite often this is NOT the case, the aircraft is NOT configured for IFR flight (avionics), it's way off normal IFR routes and way below MSAs, the necessary charts are not available in the cockpit etc. Add this extra workload to transitioning to instruments while handflying a small airplane close to the ground, and you know the odds of surviving this moment is not that good, must prioritize the flying, say "standby" to ATC whenever needed, turn back if needed, ask for a hold to get stuff organized etc.