Prior to this comment, I have read the preceding posts, and the most part of the AAIB report again. I do not have access to the legal arguments. The facts are something else again....
What I think I see is that different professions involved in the aftermath of this event applied their best effort. The accident investigators recreated with their best effort, a detailed summary of the circumstances, with supporting evidence. Then, the legal system applied their best effort to call it all into question. I suppose that a non aviation familiar court were persuaded by the legal arguments.
Something reasonably clear was made muddy, and then found to not be transparent any more. In my personal opinion this does not equate to innocence, just muddy.
Could that pilot tell himself that that flight was conducted by him so as to create the most safe flying experience for his passenger? Were that pilot's reported aerobatics on the previous flight conducted with due regard for safety and regulatory compliance (entry altitude & his competence)? Did he intend that his second flight be more safe than his first? Do we aviation people disbelieve the product of the AAIB investigation?