I've raised the issue of pilots presuming the description "professional" before, and pointed out that the members of true professions do not engage in public criticism or public negative speculation about their colleagues. It brings the entire profession into disrepute because the members' opinions on the subject are perceived as having greater weight and authority. As I said earlier, there are already plenty of people out there ready and willing (and in some cases remunerated) to find fault in pilots. Their colleagues don't need to 'pile on'.
Because the members of "true professions" are such pillars of society. Professions such as lawyers I would imagine or accountants even. You profess such distaste of pilots piling on yet here you are posting day in day out. I imagine most professional pilots will learn to live with your disapproval. Training aircraft simply don't nose over and impact the ground at high descent rates with high power settings. If they did then they would be grounded immediately by the flying schools that operate them. You can come up with any number of possible combinations of airframe or engine failure which may have lead to that accident but the simple, albeit distressing, explanation that it was deliberate also fits the evidence.
If there is a mechanical fault then my apologies to the family will be unreserved. If the report states that it was not able to determine the cause of the accident then that will not bring closure for them either.