If there'd been an erroneous report of CAVOK or the like, and the crew then found to their supprise that conditions were actually below minima, then there'd be a number of people eating their words.
I see nothing in that report however to suggest any factor other than deficiencies with in-flight decision making, and possibly company or individual standards of flight planning. The personification of the PIC was the media's fault, and personal attacks on anyone in relation to an incident/accident are unnecessary.
One would imagine if the operator flies to Norfolk, then they would have standard procedures for fuel and diversions. One would assume these wouldn't include the process of: flight - missed approach - missed approach - missed approach - wet pants - wet pax.