No I am not saying at all he lied, but the case can be argued various ways. What I am saying is that the court expected from Michael Barr to give expert testimony if the firmware was of "good enough" quality, given the constraints of the market and the risks.

It's easy to overreact after a tragic incident (and I have full sympathy with the families), and to demand more stringent certification, but it comes at a cost as well, the price for the software goes up.