Read it again...
I have no opinion on this accident. Writing about such things in general though, there are a couple of facts some of you might want to stop and think about:
1. Most accidents are due to pilot error. They are not usually due to mechanical failure. This is reflected in the statistical analysis of accidents; it is not an assumption of error on my part about any particular accident. Pilots are human and they sometimes get things wrong.
2. From my experience, post-accident, 'most people' assume that the accident pilot 'must have done something wrong.' In other words, yes indeed, he or she is in the difficult position of having to prove a negative, that they did not do something wrong, due to the incontrovertible fact of an accident having taken place. Dead people usually are unable to do this sort of thing, so that the assumption often persists. It is the obvious answer and it is usually the correct one!
When you are trying to argue against these things without having the facts to back that up then you are in a very weak position. It might be a good idea to stop arguing and to wait for the usual period of time, usually at least a year, for whatever investigation is taking place to be concluded and then for the investigation final report to be published. At that time you may have some facts to argue from, even if that is, as many of you already presume, that there has been no proper investigation. So far you just have the obvious emotional response to the death of a friend and/or colleague. That is touching but largely irrelevant to the general audience here.