Like most posts on this thread, LB's was made before it was known that MoD concealed the existence of at least twelve RAF training films, imparting the information Martin-Baker were accused of not providing. Nor was it widely appreciated that the Judge, Mrs Justice Carr, actually named in court one MoD recipient. But she had to accept Martin-Baker's guilty plea. (The book explains the process whereby he signed for the information, and it was disseminated within MoD).
The company did not commit manslaughter or criminal negligence. But a prima facie case exists that MoD personnel did, by issuing instructions to technicians NOT to follow Martin-Baker's information, or the technical training provided by the RAF.
The fine detail of the problem was understood, and was dealt with twice in the training films. Also, in the technical publications and training provided by Martin-Baker (until MoD cancelled the contract in 1983). After the accident, MoD even issued a directive that Martin-Baker's information was STILL NOT to be implemented.
In 2018 Jonathan Bayliss was killed at RAF Valley. TWELVE factors in the Cunningham case were repeated. MoD had assured the Coroner in 2014 that they were being, or had been, acted upon. It lied. A recurring theme. And not forgetting that the Cunningham accident was itself a recurrence, repeating the failure that killed Simon Burgess - failure to conduct disturbed systems testing.
And yes OMS, you're regarded as vexatious if you ask questions about this! By both MoD and the legal establishment.