'Many of those voices, many of those cases, many of those stories will stay with me forever."
So said the chairwoman of the Lindsay tribunal, as the two-year inquiry drew to a close last month. She was referring to those who gave testimony of suffering and grief caused by the HIV and hepatitis C infection tragedies.
Judge Alison Lindsay also thanked the treating doctors and carers who gave evidence, and all those "who had to relive those harrowing times in the '80s and '90s". They were fitting words upon which to end the inquiry as it was a difficult tribunal for all concerned.
For the Irish Blood Transfusion Service (IBTS), there was the ignominy of having its name dragged through the mud once more.
Treating doctor Prof Ian Temperley had to endure having his clinical and policy decisions put under a microscope.
For the victims - the estimated 252 people infected with blood products used for the treatment of haemophilia - and their relatives and friends, there was a spectrum of emotion.
There was satisfaction at the airing of issues but there was also annoyance at the limitations put on the inquiry, and the exclusion of the pharmaceutical companies from its scope. Some comfort came from addressing the tribunal. But further hurt was caused by the absence of an apology from the IBTS, as well as a perceived marginalisation of the Irish Haemophilia Society by the inquiry.
And so what are the matters Judge Lindsay must consider? They divide up into three areas: the BTSB, as the IBTS was formerly known; the Department of Health; and the doctors. Of the three, arguably the BTSB responded worst to the HIV and hepatitis C threats. The tribunal heard the blood bank failed to adhere to Department instructions in 1986 to withdraw blood products which had not been heat-treated to guard against HIV. The BTSB contested the Department's interpretation of events but admitted it should have acted sooner to combat the risk of AIDS.
A more serious accusation was that the BTSB "dumped" non-heat-treated material in hospitals after it had been explicitly instructed by treating doctors to begin heat-treatment. The BTSB maintained there was "no cogent evidence" of such dumping. However, the tribunal heard that in a fortnightly period in late 1985 the blood bank supplied St James's Hospital alone with a quantity of untreated product that exceeded the hospital's needs four times over. The product continued to infect people until February 1986.
As for the Department of Health, the main point of criticism relates to its mean-spirited approach to the issue of compensating haemophiliacs infected with HIV.
The third group of players are the treating doctors, Prof Temperley and his colleagues. Evidence suggested the doctors did not always adhere to treatment protocols, failed to inform patients of the risks, and were sometimes slow to deliver diagnoses. At the same time, they were said to be working in "impossible" circumstances, each doing the job of several consultants.