JP
Your reply as to the Birmingham affair illustrated my point about assumptions very nicely. The suspects were certainly travelling from Birmingham to Ireland whan arrested, but travelling from Birmingham to Ireland was not a crime then, nor is it now. It is not surprising, in the climate of the moment, that they would have aroused suspicion, but your use of the term "hot-footing" indicates the same pre-disposition to assume guilt which was likely to have been prevalent at the time. As for the fact that the Police made no further investigations (so far as we know) once the convictions collapsed, are you assuming again that this is significant? Perhaps that the Police believed they had got the right target the first time? Well, possibly. But it might also mean that the Police recognised that many years after the event, and in the light of adverse publicity in the meantime, there was little likelihood of finding evidence against anyone else when they hadn't looked for it closer to the event. Or perhaps they just considered it not in the public interest to devote any further resources to the case. I don't know.
Since we have both said our piece, and we risk straying off the main point, let's call it quits and allow the debate to continue.
By the way, thank you for the politeness of your posts. They are a pleasure to read, even if I disagree with you.
Regards
Ginseng