Private Jet
Your point was very relevant.
The original ruling of gross negligence inferred “absolutely no doubt whatsoever” that it was pilot error – this effectively stonewalled further investigation into the crash for 17 years.
As the grounds the AVM's used were easily seen as baseless from the most basic analysis of the available data, it is possible that the verdict was politically motivated.
I suggested that this was the case many years ago, that it was to avoid public disquiet had there been any chance of, say, sabotage, and predicted that the pilots' names could be cleared when it was deemed safe to do so – apparently, the time has come.
All of the areas of concern arising from the airworthiness viewpoint (eg FADEC) could be discounted from objective consideration of the available data.
It is noteworthy that media (eg the Telegraph and the BBC) still tell the public that the crash occurred in “thick fog” when we know that this quite the wrong scenario of the local weather.
I don't want to rain on their parade but all the campaigners have left the public with is an impression that someone driving at 150 MPH in thick fog was not to blame as there were some irregularities with the vehicle's MOT.
The crew deserves better than this.