Lonewolf - I think you have slipped 'off target' here. I do not see reference to the a/c 'computer' in the article. The reference as I see it is to the maintenance computer at HQ which should have triggered action, possibly a grounding pending investigation, after 3 similar failures on a particular airframe. It is suggested the computer did not issue the action so the a/c continued in service. This does NOT mitigate the errors by the crew.
I am sure the initial investigation of the crash was undertaken by 'investigators' and I believe the judge is there to oversee the whole enquiry.