Heliport, I was surprised at you taking such a leading position.
Rule 5 (2)
(e) Flying over open air assemblies
Except with the permission in writing of the CAA, an aircraft shall not fly over an organised open-air assembly of more than 1,000 persons below:
(i) a height of 1,000 feet, or
(ii) such height as will permit, in the event of a power unit failure, the aircraft to alight clear of the assembly,
whichever is the
higher. (my emphasis)
(f) Landing and taking off near open air assemblies
An aircraft shall not land or take-off within 1,000 metres of an organised open-air assembly of more than 1,000 persons, except:
(i) at an aerodrome, in accordance with procedures notified by the CAA, or
(ii) at a landing site other than an aerodrome, in accordance with procedures notified by the CAA and with the written permission of the organiser of the assembly.
This rule is carefully worded in such a way as to remove any doubt about whether the power available, alternate areas for rejection, etc. should be considered. I recall thinking about the possible objections when I sat my first Air Law exam back in 1980. I also recall the CFI explaining that (a) you can't examine every single incident so you write clear rules and (b) human herd behaviour is sometimes odd and unpredictable, best not to excite them!
Whether or not you regard such a Law as sensible (given the specifics of this location, the timing, etc.) it was clearly broken. Then broken again, just after 're-training'. I rather think the authority may have been assuming there's there's an attitiude issue here.
Clearly, there are many parts of the ANO where the reasoning is obscure to me ... for example the rules on how high you can fly a kite in an ATZ! (30m AGL btw), or the maximum volume of airship you can tether at an airfield without telling the CAA.
In this case there is a specific procedure, which if Mr Paxton had followed it, would have rendered the flights legal.
Respectfully,
NIMBY