Wiltshire Police's investigation into claims Sir Edward Heathwas a paedophile has courted controversy ever since it was first launched publicly outside the former prime minister's home.
When Superintendent Sean Memory used a television appeal in August 2015 to urge potential victims of Sir Edward to come forward, friends of the former prime minister dismissed the child sex abuse allegations as "totally uncharacteristic and unlikely".
Former colleagues also rallied to defend his reputation and criticised the way the investigation was being handled.
What began as a corruption probe over claims the prosecution of a brothel owner was dropped after threats were made to expose Sir Edward morphed into Operation Conifer, with Wiltshire Police leading at least seven forces carrying out inquiries into the former prime minister.
Investigations later revealed there was no evidence to support the corruption claims involving madam Myra Ling-Ling Forde.
In November last year a whistleblower, who was enlisted by detectives to examine the Operation Conifer evidence, said she had "exposed a catalogue of fabrication" at the heart of the probe.
Dr Rachel Hoskins, a criminologist, also branded the inquiry "a disgrace" and said that, while the force had accepted her report, she had "little confidence" police would pass the findings on to MPs.
The following month, the chief constable of Wiltshire Police, Mike Veale, wrote a public letter to "set the record straight" about the £1.5 million investigation, saying it was "complex and multi-stranded" and was "not a fishing trip or witch hunt".
Lord Macdonald, the former director of public prosecutions, accused Mr Veale of presiding over a "tragi-comedy of incompetence" and called for a judge-led inquiry into how Sir Edward's name was "so shockingly traduced".
But some politicians have backed Mr Veale, including current Salisbury MP John Glen, who described him as a "dedicated and principled police officer", who did "the right thing and decided that every allegation of such a serious crime must be judged on its own merits, however unpleasant and controversial."
Operation Conifer was not the only high-profile police inquiry of recent times - set up in the wake of the Jimmy Savile scandal - to attract fierce criticism.
Sir Bernard Hogan-Howe, the then Met commissioner, faced calls to quit after Operation Midland - launched by Scotland Yard to investigate claims of a VIP paedophile ring and murder allegations - closed in March last year without a single arrest being made.
The investigation centred on the claims of one individual, known only as "Nick", and related to a 10-year period in the 1970s and 1980s.
Former Conservative MP Harvey Proctor, who was questioned as part of Operation Midland, revealed Sir Edward and ex-home secretary Leon Brittan had been named among his "alleged co-conspirators".
Sir Edward was the most high-profile political figure to be linked to child sex abuse allegations that swept across Westminster.
A raft of politicians from across the political spectrum has been accused of abusing children, including Mr Proctor, Liberal Democrat Sir Cyril Smith and Labour peer and former MP Lord Janner.
It is thought Wiltshire detectives believe they have avoided the errors made by earlier high-profile investigations by not relying on a single source.
Operation Conifer may now have ended, but questions about its handling and wider issues surrounding the way police approach cases involving historical allegations will rumble on.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules here