Hi Mr Purdey,
The evidence of the 'lone' yachtsman should be given the credit it deserves. Mr Holbrook was a witness - the last known eye witness, and his evidence should be given equal merit as afforded to those whose evidence fits the profile best preferred by the MoD. We weren't there. He was, so I for one, don't feel it my place to tell him what he did, or didn't see.
Mr Holbrook's evidence stated that the aircraft was low (as agreed by you), and slow enough for him to believe it to be on a search & rescue mission. So that last bit doesn't fit in with the MoD's belief of 'highish' speed and is therefore either rubbished or conveniently ignored.
I neither know, nor care, whether the controls locked in the last few minutes. They may have done. Equally the crew (all four of them), may have been negligent. However, without the absolute proof required, the verdict is unsustainable - and it is this final point that I have bored everyone rigid with, for the past twelve years.
No-one knows what took place on that flight. We know the beginning, we know the end, but as to what occurred prior to that tragic ending no-one is in any position at all to state with enough evidence to satisfy the burden of proof.
My best, as always.
Brian
"Justice has no expiry date" - John Cook