Man Flex
If the pilot applies sufficient back stick for a sufficient amount of time then the trim will wind fully back to the stop. This is what happened during the deceleration phase of the Perpignan Accident and almost certainly what happened during the Air France 447 tragedy.
Fair enough, Man Flex - except that I can't recall (unless I missed it) any reference to the Perpignan pilot applying 'up stick'? Please correct me if I'm wrong?
And secondly, the ('vestigial)' BEA 'note' about AF447 does indeed refer to the PF applying 'up stick' in the early stages of the accident -but it ALSO says, in the next paragraph:-
"The airplane’s pitch attitude increased progressively beyond 10 degrees and the plane started to climb. The PF made nose-down control inputs and alternately left and right roll inputs. The vertical speed, which had reached 7,000 ft/min, dropped to 700 ft/min and the roll varied between 12 degrees right and 10 degrees left. The speed displayed on the left side increased sharply to 215 kt (Mach 0.68). The airplane was then at an altitude of about 37,500 ft and the recorded angle of attack was around 4 degrees."
So it appears, on the face of it, that the PF 'did the right thing,' recovered control, and restored the aeroplane to a stable flightpath and a sensible attitude? But - important point - the THS didn't respond?
On the airbus this happens automatically. The pilot pitches the aeroplane up with sidestick inputs and the computer trims off the resulting "pressure" (you can still see the trim wheel rotating back during this process).
If the pilot applies sufficient back stick for a sufficient amount of time then the trim will wind fully back to the stop. This is what happened during the deceleration phase of the Perpignan Accident and almost certainly what happened during the Air France 447 tragedy.
In some conditions the auto-trim disconnects (abnormal attitude and direct law) and the trim setting and therefore wheel and stabiliser will remain in that final position until either
a) auto-trim is restored
or
b) the pilot moves the trim wheel manually!
Entirely acceptable in after-dinner parlour games. But NOT, IMO, on airliners travelling at around 400 knots at well under 10,000 feet......
OK, I'll stick my neck out. I think that it's high time that aviation (Airbus, but also Boeing if appropriate) adopted a principle called 'failsafe.' At one time (I'm actually ancient enough to know 
) it was new to my own industry - but it was a 'blinding light' at the time, and (in my own experience) started saving lives within months.......
What it would have amounted to, in aviation terms, is that the 'systems' should have reverted to neutral settings after they signed off - so that the autotrim, for example, would not have just signed off and left the THS at an unheard-of 13 degrees up or so, but would have reduced the angle to a conventional setting (say 3 degrees up or so).
But even that 'begs the question' of how long the THS actually TAKES to adjust. From the BEA 'note,' it appears to have taken the best part of a minute to go from 3 degrees to 13 degrees - presumably it would have taken most of another minute to go back from 13 degrees to any sort of reasonable angle? Considering that the whole accident happened within not much more than three minutes, that still wouldn't have given the pilots much chance?
OK - as just a 'seat of the pants' amateur pilot from many years ago (who mainly flew sailplanes because I couldn't afford powered aeroplanes) I'll stick my neck out.
And say that, in my (genuinely-humble) opinion, both manufacturers should actively consider whether such 'new' features as slow-acting, but enormously powerful THS's - as opposed to old-fashioned, under-powered, but quick-acting trim-tabs -are 'a step too far'.........