Pulse,
In one guise or another I have been in the thick of this thread for quite a few years now and fully understand JP's mindset. The problem for me is that on every occasion I ask him a direct question he slips and slides and simply refuses to answer and I fully expect more of the same.
He freely admits that there are at least 2 possibilities with regards to the weather but if you ask him which one is correct he cannot answer because again he does not actually know, something he has already freely admitted.
I have asked him directly if the fact that the weather at the waypoint, on the subsequent leg and at the crash site is not actually known then surely that casts enough doubt on the verdict in this case but he again refuses to reply.
His assertion, as you point out is that the crews gross negligence was committed at the waypoint turn but if he cannot even tell us what the weather was at that point how on earth can he reach that conclusion.
There is doubt about the weather, which he himself has admitted, which in turn means the very exact conditions of the verdict have not been met and it should be overturned and justice will then be done.