No, it wasn't destroyed in a criminal act. The aircraft was partially reconstructed to determine the cause of failure. It was reconstructed to a further extent to provide a teaching environment for future crash investigators.

I disagree, but that's not for this thread.

Why would the aircraft need to be reconstructed to determine that?

Are you claiming that if there had been a bomb in the plane that detonated, you would definitely be able to tell without a reconstruction? Please explain how this would automatically be the case.

Begging the question. Basically you can't think of anything.

Not if you can't explain how plane reconstructions are never necessary for determining if a bomb was involved.