Crab,
On the day and in the conditions I would say that Mr Armstrong was "the Search and Rescue Pilot".
Not in the way you would understand as a dedicated pilot but he was the one doing the "searching and rescuing".
Having flown in NZ and the UK I don't think you may appreciate the differences.
The UK is tiny - you can see from one end to the other on a good day and it is basically flat.
I don't think it even has mountains?
NZ - think Switzerland with UK weather.
The single biggest attribute to successful SAR in NZ is local knowledge.
This is backed up by empirical evidence over the years and REGA in Switzerland would concur.
Most of their bases utilise pilots from local operators on a roster, it is that important and having flown there as well
I would estimate a pilot without local knowledge would not last a month before hitting some obstacle.
I am guessing that Mr Armstrong being told as to where the victim was he would have been able to fly there visually
and from memory without any nav aids or even a map.
Most of the dedicated SAR machinery in NZ spend 99% of their time doing transfers to better medical facilities. Their "local knowledge"
is probably limited to being able to program a GPS.
From your profile I am assuming that you operate (or did) the SK61.
In NZ that would be about as useful as a chocolate fireguard or similar unless you had a 1000' winch cable and can hover in cloud.
As to -
How unusual for someone from the Green party to rant about stuff they don't understand.
I would suggest that respectfully you may be in the same boat as someone from the Green Party.
Mr Armstrong has apparently pleaded guilty - "as charged". The issue is whether the charge makes sense.