You will recall that the Reviewing Officers deemed the Pilots to be negligent before the "Waypoint Change" (0.95 NM from impact) - when even the HOL Committee admitted the Pilots were in control of the aircraft.
Caz's way with words is quite amazing. The HOL did not have any reason to believe the pilots were not in control of the aircraft at waypoint change - they also were agreed there was no evidence that the pilots were negligent.
Every independant examination of the limited facts agrees that the ROs were both out of order, according to the rules they were duty bound to obey, and had a personal interest in diveriting attention from the appalling state of the 'airworthiness' system.
To allow the systemic failures can be understood on the grounds that they judged (or misjudged) budgetary considerations to override safety. To foist this verdict on two JOs who were no longer in a position to defend themselves, is conduct unbecoming an officer and a gentleman.