There are many posts on this thread that I find quite disturbing. Unless we know the cues and information presented to and recognised by the crew then we cannot decide upon the possible courses of action that were available to them and, with hindsight, consider which was the best course that they should have taken. If their course of action was not what retrospectively was considered to be the one that would have had the best outcome then we would then need to try to ascertain why they took the course of action that they did. There will be many potential human factors considerations that may exonerate the crew totally. At the other end of the spectrum the actions that they took could have been reckless and constitute manslaughter. Both pilots are still alive and could give witness statements. However, to understand the reality of their actions such statements must not be admissible as self-incriminating documents.
In situations such as this workload is very high and spare capacity for assessing external cues and decision making is reduced. I find it very scary that so many who have posted on here are judge and jury and, frankly, appear to have very little understanding of human performance and limitations with respect to operating aircraft.