Thanks for those posts Brian, I think it has saved me from buying the book.
As Mr Slessor points out, the difference between the two 'sides' is mind set. WE are all quite willing to accept any reason, including gross negligence, for this crash.
THEY will not bend to accept that the evidence for the finding is simply not up to the required standard.
If ANYONE can post conclusive proof of negligence, we'd all pack up and p**s off.
Trouble is, that this question is normally answered along the lines of 'with no evidence of any other cause, it MUST have been negligence'. and there we go, full circle.
FDR and CVT would have it buttoned up. But.................................