Load factor and pitch rate demand is not relevant to this particular point. It is sufficient to base the discussion on "AutoTrim" and the need to fly manually whilst another axis is C*.
I politely reject your contention that there was "panic" or excess "fear" on the flight deck.
I thought the CVR (that released by Otelli) demonstrated that the profanity, and the reasonable questions: "But what is it doing....?" Show an engagement that belies panic.
I also reject the "PIO" determination when the roll axis got "challenging", when other evidence points to an approach to Stall dynamic: "uncommanded roll, unresponsive controls, buffeting, and an active Stall Warn" (both audio and ECAM). That the aircraft then entered an uncontrollable climb also suggests other, and patent derivations: Air Caraibes, Indonesia, Metro, etc. instead of "pilot pulled aft stick....
The report's record is derived from evidence that is subject to considerable interpretation, and there is no conclusive causation here.
Can you help with your memory of the early ACARS data? Reported by French employees of the airline, there was this: "TURBULENCES FORTES..." The system reports via satellite. The crew knew they had poor radio comms, can the crew type a message to Paris via Satellite, concurrent with mechanical reporting?