The pub bombings inquest jury decided West Midlands Police could not have done anything to prevent the IRA attacks. But litigation consultant Chris Stanley, of KRW LAW LLP which represents 10 bereaved families, insists the force's exoneration is not a vindication of their actions - and they must now press ahead with the criminal investigation.
The verdict of the jury in The Birmingham Inquests has now been delivered.
There are two main points: That 21 innocent people were unlawfully killed by the IRA in an act of murder and that the West Midlands Police could not have done anything to prevent this.
The importance of this verdict is that for the families there is now an official record of the murder of their loved ones; for the West Midlands Police an exoneration of their actions at the time.
A verdict of unlawful killing by murder means that the duty to investigate this crime remains with the police and prosecutors who must assess the evidence presented during the inquest.
This was why the Coroner and the Courts ruled that the issue of who was responsible for the bombings was not within the scope of the inquest but rested with the criminal justice system.
The exoneration of the West Midlands Police was based on the evidence the jury was presented with. They made that clear in their comment to the Coroner.
It cannot be claimed as a vindication of police action because much of this evidence was read into the record and could not be examined.
Some of the evidence had been destroyed or gone missing. There was little live evidence was available to examine save for the police on the ground on that night.
No senior officers were available to be questioned. There was no record of any policies, procedures, training or guidelines as to how to respond to or prevent a terrorist attack in an IRA bombing and incendiary campaign that had already been over a year in progress and with over 50 reported incidents – including against The Rotunda.
Some might think that everyone knew it was unlawful killing and murder and ask what was the point after all these years.
The point is that there is now an official record of this.
More importantly, and one of the ironic twists in this inquest, was that the question of the suspected perpetrators, although not put to the jury, did enter the court record by way of the admission of Witness O and the examination of Chris Mullin.
The names of Seamus McLoughlin, Mick Murray, James Gavin, who are dead, for so long assumed to be responsible, were offered to the inquest.
The names of two suspects, Michael Hayes and Michael Patrick Reilly, who are alive, are now also in the public domain.
One of the roles of an inquest is to allay rumour and suspicion and unless action is taken to question Mr Hayes and Mr Reilly then rumour and suspicion will continue.
In addition, Kieran Conway and Chris Mullin must also be investigated, the former on the basis of his autobiography and previous calls to have him questioned by the police and the latter because of his continued insistence on not confirming the names he knows.
A criminal prosecution might enable further disclosure of information.
The inquest produced almost 30,000 pages of material. However, the inquest was reliant upon the assurances of the relevant government departments and agencies.
In addition, the Coroner and his legal team decided on what was to be disclosed or redacted (a process that was on-going even during the last week of the inquest), based on their interpretation of the scope of the inquest, and mindful of avoiding conflict with the security services.
Witness O confirmed that Mick Murray maintained that MI5 knew in advance about the bombings. That rumour persists – why would Mick Murray maintain this view?
For the families represented KRW LAW LLP, the day of the verdict was one of mixed emotions. The last six weeks was the first time the families of their loved ones were able to engage in any effective form of investigation into their murder.
Now we must wait and see how the West Midlands Police will involve the families in their investigations. This is the end of part of the quest for truth, justice and accountability.
It is not the end of the process as questions raised by the inquest raise the demand for more answers.
in a more recent interview with ITV News he denied any involvement in the 1974 atrocity.
Mr Reilly was identified as one of the suspected bombers an ITV Exposure last year.
But when he was confronted in Belfast by reporter John Ware, he denied planting the bombs, or knowing the bombings were going to take place.
"I've got nothing to say," he said.