Nimby
I allow myself a personal view a few times each year.
Rule 5 (2)(e) Flying over open air assemblies
What's that got to do with it?
The CAA didn't claim he flew
over (my emphasis) the revellers, and they didn't claim he would have been unable to alight clear of the assembly in the event of a power unit failure.
Rule 5 (2)(f) Landing and taking off near open air assemblies.
Even if a law restricting landing and taking off up to a kilometre away is sensible, enforcing it by prosecuting someone "given the specifics of this location, the timing, etc" and the circumstances is not sensible IMHO.
"it was clearly broken"
I don't think it's clear the law was broken on the second occasion.
Then broken again, just after 're-training'. I rather think the authority may have been assuming there's there's an attitiude issue here.
Fair enough, but that's not how I see it.
H.
Interesting link 