A large section of "the community" regards Bitcoin Foundation and everything it stands for as reprehensible, so to characterise accusations against its leadership as a "crime against community" is beyond hyperbolic.  Many believe the very existence of BF to be a "crime against the Bitcoin community" and the organisation to be rotten to the core.

Now if you had said that Phin often acts impulsively to the point of recklessness when he comes across what he believes is a smoking gun, I would have to agree with you.  An altruistic impulse is still an impulse, and this particular one cannot reflect well on Phin in any way.  His accusations are either baseless - which reflects badly on him - or by not releasing the information he has which supports his assertions he has now become part of the "cover up" - which also reflects badly on him.  Phin's flair for the dramatic has truly bitten him in the ass this time and I suspect no-one is more aware of that than Phin himself.

I'm curious about why you are championing Patrick specifically as any accusations against Patrick reflect also on BF.  If an apology is due to Patrick, one is also due to the Foundation - an organisation whose reputation has already been damaged by the actions of its leaders and whose reputation can only be further damaged by unwarranted allegations against those who replaced them.