Pilots are supposed to bias more towards facts and less towards emotion
Absolutely, I'm with you regarding the posthumely promotion of them dip**** US-army pilots, but let's look at the facts here:
A)
Thomas coupling
Now in the UK, ANYONE who clacks a blade, not once but twice - and then attempts a field repair as an UNqualified helicopter engineer - and then continues in flight; is most definitely guilty of gross negligence as a pilot.
True, but
he was qualified (acc. to Eurocopter) and his repaired blades didn't need any mod. by the manufacturer.
B)
Thomas coupling Someone who nearly collides with / blows over other a/c is guilty of negligence
True, and
he's guilty of that.
C)
Thomas coupling
Someone who flies his a/c in IFR conditions without the correct qualifications is guilty of negligence and poor airmanship.
True, but
we dont know that, yet. That short video clip of his passing over the videographer didn'tlook like IMC to me.
Case A) is on the border of calumny, especially coming from CASA. Looking at the facts everyone who - despite the facts - publicly claims, that back then he were flying a badly reapaired, unworthy a/c
owes him an apology, CASA, you(?), all the rich-guy bashers led by emotion instead of fact.
Case B) is plain and simple true, he did behave like an asshole sometimes.
Case C) is totally open to investigation, facts are currently unknown, and, as you stated correctly, we ought grant him benefit of doubt until proven otherwise.
Which currently(!) leaves us with an definitely sometimes ignorant, selfish, but nervertheless in many cases very cacpable pilot/mechanic.