Come on guys, he wasnt going that fast, wasn't near VMO. If a plane comes apart at slow speeds with a rudder imput, not talkin elevator here, then I think that plane might need to be flight tested.
I am frankly astonished that after all the warnings which were issued after this accident, regarding the potentially catastrophic effect of large rudder inputs AT SPEED EVEN BELOW VA, that anyone could dismiss the idea that rudder inputs could overload a transport category aircraft with such disdain.
Every single Part 25 aircraft with conventional flight controls (i.e. disregarding those with envelope protection) can undoubtedly be brought to the point of inflight break-up by means of flight control applications, even at speeds comparable to this accident. The only differentiation between types is the degree of input (or number of inputs) required, and the associated cockpit forces. But they WILL all do it.
In fact, any aircraft claiming to be resilient to such inputs is in fact BADLY designed, because there was - and still is! - NO certification design requirement to withstand such inputs. And I suspect there never will be; it's not the intent of the regulations to specify a pilot-proof aircraft, simply one that can be operated safely if trained accordingly.