Wanda stans love to defend her actions in WandaVision, and I get their arguments mostly, but nobody has anything to say about her bewitching the Hulk into a violent rage that directly caused innocent people to be murdered in South Africa. This was her in full control, doing something she had to have known would get people hurt, at minimum, and likely killed. Quicksilver even tried to pack it up and leave, but she stopped him because she wanted to do this.

You're acting on the Watsonian assumption that Wanda intentionally released the Hulk on Johannesburg, when the Doylist explanation is that the writers were just looking for an excuse to have a Hulk rampage.

I could argue Wanda didn't actually want to unleash the Hulk, she only wanted to render Bruce catatonic like the other Avengers (though Ultron probably knew otherwise as to what would actually happen). Even if Wanda did intend to release the Hulk, why would she send him to a city that's several hundred miles away, instead of siccing him on the mostly catatonic Avengers? You could say "she was trying to distract Tony", but trying to stop the Hulk from killing his teammates would've kept Tony plenty distracted as well. And from what we've seen of her character before and after this one event, Wanda doesn't want innocent people to get hurt, which was why she and her brother abandoned Ultron. And Wanda does seem genuinely remorseful about unleashing the Hulk when she and Pietro turn up in Avengers Tower with Steve.

In all honesty, this debate should just be chalked up to inconsistent writing in Age of Ultron.