from what I can gather here HP really wanted Autonomy
I think it's more that Apotheker and Robison really wanted Autonomy, and they convinced a weak board of directors to go along with them. Most other people at HP seemed either ignorant of or leery about the deal.
Not that I think Lynch et al. are innocent; they promoted a wildly excessive valuation for Autonomy, and while I'm in no position to judge Hussain (not having access to all the evidence, nor made a close review off it), I'm not going to ignore his conviction either. But Apotheker, and perhaps Robison, seem to have forced through a deal that was widely and correctly perceived as very bad for HP.
And, frankly, in my opinion the directors of HP should share a healthy portion of the blame, particularly since HP's board (unusually) had a "technical committee" which was supposed to review all M&A before it went before the whole board. There's some suspicion that the board appointed Whitman - who was on the board during Apotheker's term - as the new CEO partly so she could work to deflect blame away from them.