I am in agreement with Legalapproach. I also point out that for the subject aircraft type there is still no requirement to undertake a formal aerobatic course, (as repeatedly already stated, not that there is any relevance whether there was or was not in relation to the subject accident - an unintentional fully developed spin with a stuck rudder).
BPF, I am in agreement with the general safety messages for aviation. The problem is that your comments are not applicable to this case and as such are a disservice by application here.
My expert opinion as an aerobatic instructor is that there was a clear pattern of reckless flying exhibited that day
In addition to this comment being demonstrably wrong, I find that comment quite remarkable where you have presumably not first studied and analysed the totality of the evidence...? Your comment has an air of the approach by one of the prosecution 'experts', who came rather unstuck when confronted by the evidence from experts who had properly analysed and considered all the actual evidence.
There are certainly concerns and lessons to be learned here, just not the ones you appear to be peddling. I suggest it would be better to start with the training (scope of PPL syllabus), mentoring and investigation systems...