Yet they thought that flimsy circumstantial evidence which involved co-ercing a witness to put back his time (Alan Close), Poo pooing John Parkes and Mr Atkinsons account (assuming it did happen) and jiggling about the Anfield Harriers time trials to suit their purpose, not coming up with any motive or account for the lack of bloodstaining on Wallace and MacFall being inept on at least 3 counts would stick. Well it very nearly did due to a possibly prejudiced jury who could have read the papers and had a pre-conceived opinion of Wallace. This despite Justic Wright all but directing them to find WHW not guilty?