That's what they expect, what they demand. But this guy can't say "I learned" or "Here's my case for why I am ready to be trusted again." Not honestly.
In my past (thankfully not recently) I've had to do a somewhat dishonest apology where I said I had "learned" that X was wrong and I wouldn't do it again, when really what I had learned was that I needed to manage my depression more carefully so that I wouldn't get into a state where doing X seemed like the only bearable option even though I knew it would disappoint people.
In my case, it was possible for me to insulate people from dealing with my depression directly, by translating my apology into terms that were comfortable for them. I could recite the script they wanted to hear, because I could honestly say the important parts, "I learned, and I'm ready to be trusted again," because the trajectory of my depression is something I understand pretty well and can anticipate and manage. I am fortunate that way. The only way I had to be dishonest was in omitting the true details of what I learned and why I thought I could be trusted in the future, replacing those details with the ones they wanted to hear.
This guy can't really do that, so he can't conform to the script. He can't "learn" that it's bad to have a psychotic episode, he can't "learn" how not to do it, he can only learn not to ignore his psychiatrist and not to go off his meds, and I think deep down he knows that if the effectiveness of his medication drops, because of a change in his underlying condition or some other factor, his judgment may be impaired to the point where he can't be trusted to keep taking it.
I think what probably rubs people the wrong way is that he won't say he's responsible for what he did in the way they want him to say he's responsible. It makes sense to me that he won't say it, because that would be claiming that he is capable of being responsible in a manic state which is a potentially dangerous and damaging lie. I understand him not being willing to say that, even under duress.