A mechanic is certified to standards set by the regulating authority. It is the Regulating Authority that controls airworthiness and compliance. It is not for the mechanic to make judgments relative to airworthiness, only to comply with "the book".
A/P mechanics are not philosophers, nor do they have authority to make life and death decisions. To impute other than the duty of compliance with Code is to get truly in the weeds. The controlling Authority can issue a 337 for any "Ramp Repair" or not.
An objective judgment is simply that, an opinion with the power of the Court, French, or any other jurisdiction. The takeaway from this unfortunate accident is that to focus "Blame" is far more important than the progress of safety. There is a definite argument to be made that incompetence can lead to disaster. The defining limit of Random chance seems to allow for the perseverance of chasing a theory into the extreme.
The repair was preposterous. If it indeed caused this crash, any theory is plausible.
It is hard to reject the claim that this is proven. Weighed with the unfortunate history of the aircraft's problems in this area specifically, singling out Mr. Taylor to shoulder the brunt makes the process look silly. It relieves the Authority of responsibility paid for with punishment of another. Taylor becomes the Proxy, the goat, for a litany of Manufacturing, Design, and Regulatory issues. The relationships that control are left to blunder on. IMO.
bearfoil