What a magnificent thread. I'm going to add my two cents worth, the company is as guilty as hell.
Before you all jump down my throat, this has absolutely nothing to do with the technical matters.
Someone said it in the beginning. There were procedures in place, minimum descent altitudes etc, to keep everyone safe. These procedures were not followed in the interests of giving the passengers a better view.
The fact that the procedures were not followed was known to the company. It appears they knew but did nothing about it.
The crew of the aircraft wanted to give the passengers the best view, and did not follow procedures.
In effect the company and the crew had tacitly agreed not to enforce the procedures. This cost the crew and passengers their lives.
Esso Australia did the same thing to me thirty years ago and they tried to do it again to the plant operators after the Longford gas plant explosion. They put reams of safety procedures in place - but you have no way of following them and keeping your job. You either have to resign or tacitly agree not to do things by the book and just hope that nothing bad happens. If something does happen - well you weren't following procedures were you? Blame the victims.
Of course this does beg the question of wether following procedures would have kept them safe. I don't know the answer to that. Does anyone know?