The quiet, determined dignity shown by the family of independent nationalist councillor Patsy Kelly as they've sought to uncover the truth around his 1974 abduction and murder is in stark contrast to the brash moral bankruptcy of the British government's Troubles legacy plans.
A Police Ombudsman report into how Mr Kelly's death was investigated by the RUC has set out a litany of failings, from collusive behaviour and 'latent' bias, to not acting on intelligence and inadequately verifying UDR alibis.
The Kelly family say they feel vindicated by ombudsman Marie Anderson's findings.
One of Mr Kelly's sons, also named Patsy, spoke of how badly his family "had been let down by men in uniforms".
He said they were "also mindful of other families coming behind us" who hoped to uncover the truth around the death of their loved ones during the Troubles.
Mr Kelly warned that if the Conservative party's "inhumane and despicable legacy bill is passed, this pathway we have taken, with numerous obstacles over the decades, will be shut down to other families".
"This cannot be allowed to happen," he added. Yet, despite an avalanche of opposition from, among others, the north's political parties, the Irish government, numerous human rights organisations, a bipartisan group from the US Congress and - most importantly - victims themselves, the Tories are intent on pushing the legislation through parliament.
The Northern Ireland Troubles (Legacy and Reconciliation) Bill aims to end prosecutions for Troubles murders, essentially amounting to an amnesty for state security forces and paramilitary perpetrators. In addition to IRA and loyalist killers, this would include former British army soldiers as well as the UDR members linked to Mr Kelly's case.
Those who argue for the government's approach often couch it in terms of 'drawing a line under the past', as if that were somehow either benign or the only possible approach to dealing with the tragic legacy of the Troubles. That may be true in a number of cases, and there are many instances where families do indeed want nothing more than to deal with their tragedy in a private, personal way. This must be respected.
But for those who do wish to actively pursue justice, closing off that prospect - as the British government's bill would do if it becomes law - and allowing the truth of the past to be concealed is hopelessly flawed and morally indefensible.
The Kelly family now move on to the next stage of their quest for truth and justice by pressing for a fresh inquest. Others must not be excluded from doing the same.
