The most moving image of the week was of Mrs Mary Brennan standing uncertainly at her door soon after she'd heard that her son, Larry, had been shot dead in his taxi on the Ormeau Road.
Mrs Brennan lost a nephew at the height of the violence in Belfast more than 25 years ago. Now in her 70s, she must have felt there was little left to lose - until the latest round of sectarian murders began and Larry ran the risk, as the crazy cliche has it, of being in the wrong place at the wrong time.
As the television cameras retreated from her door, she stood bewildered, the picture of someone who may not be strong enough to demand an answer but who deserves to be told by whose order and in what cause her world has been reduced to this.
This is the picture and these are the questions which, I hope, will haunt the delegations travelling to London this weekend to continue the work begun in Belfast, negotiating the future of Northern Ireland.
For, little by little, they are coming to the point where they must decide between living and working together or letting others like Mrs Brennan's family die at the hands of murderers masquerading under the faded flags of faith and fatherland.
The delegations will spend less than a week in London before travelling back to Belfast and, after a pause, on to Dublin. By mid-March, when many of them will be in Washington, the optimists expect the shape of a settlement to be in sight.
And, sooner or later, they may take the precaution of spending some time in seclusion. Mr Bertie Ahern has already acknowledged offers from Finland and Austria; and no doubt there are other havens in which negotiations could continue without the presence of journalists.
This is the optimists' timetable. They base their forecasts on an assumption of sensible behaviour; at least, on the reluctance of any party or significant paramilitary to be seen as the outfit which ruined the chances of agreement.
The trouble is that what's considered sensible by the governments and their advisers may well be interpreted by some of the participants - and will certainly be interpreted by those who stand outside the process - as betrayal.
The only saving grace may be that, to defeat proposals put forward by the governments with the support of those who hold the middle ground, the extremists on either side may have to work together. A likely story . . .
But there are more immediate problems. And the first is about the paramilitary group which murdered Larry Brennan, Eddie Treanor and Ben Hughes.
The Loyalist Volunteer Force (LVF) claimed to have killed them but, as Mr Gerry Adams insisted and the RUC Chief Constable, Mr Ronnie Flanagan, has confirmed, their murderers were members of the Ulster Freedom Fighters (UFF), a bigger and better-armed organisation.
Worse still, the UFF, which last night issued its own cynical claim and promise of an end to reprisals, is indistinguishable from the Ulster Defence Association (UDA), and both are represented at the multi-party discussions by the Ulster Democratic Party (UDP).
The UDA will be remembered by many as the central organisation in the Ulster Workers' Council, whose strike paralysed Northern Ireland, left Britain's Northern policy in tatters and reduced the power-sharing (Sunningdale) executive to ruin in 1974.
But when Mr Adams and the Chief Constable blew the cover of the UFF/UDA, they also left the UDP and its leader, Mr Gary McMichael, with a dilemma. The Mitchell Principles specifically forbid the use or advocacy of violence to achieve political ends; and any party in breach of the principles is liable to be expelled.
The governments, who are in a position to act, and the centre parties, who may invite them to do so, approached the question of discipline with caution. The Alliance Party alone took the view that action was necessary.
Indeed, most parties seem willing to regard this as another of the commonplace fictions of Irish politics; like the pretence that leaders of Sinn Fein don't know what the IRA is up to and can't really be questioned about this week's criticism of the governments' joint paper.
The UFF can admit to some of the most vicious sectarian murders of recent years and, in the next breath, can talk about "a measured response".
No one seems to appreciate the irony here or the absurdity of the IRA, the leading paramilitary group in the country, warning about a "crisis in the peace process". Especially when those who recognise the dangers, like Mr John Bruton, Mr Proinsias De Rossa and Mr Des O'Malley, are given short shrift, as in the coverage of the Joint Oireachtas Committee on Foreign Affairs last week.
Mr O'Malley, who is chairman of the committee, said: "An aspect of developments in recent weeks and of the media coverage that has given me some cause for concern is the heavy concentration on the views and attitudes of those parties that are closest to the people who have engaged in prolonged terrorism."
He pointed to the danger in Dr Mo Mowlam's visit to the Maze - the perception that political power arises, not from the ballot box, but from the barrel of a gun - and of the need for the parties of the centre to seize the opportunity presented by the joint paper.
He said: "Each of the more moderate parties in the North has attributed its reluctance to make meaningful moves to the fact that it must constantly look over its shoulder at those less moderate people behind it.
"The true mark of political leadership is the willingness to take the risks that are involved. In the present situation, each of the more moderate parties can help one another by making simultaneous moves in agreement with one another which will help to reduce the political pressure."
Mr Ahern makes a sensible case for a joint paper which has logic on its side; without a Northern assembly there can be no North-South council; without a council of the isles, unionists will not take part. And Mr De Rossa, Mr Bruton and Mr Ruairi Quinn are ready to support the Taoiseach in the Dail.
Neither Mr Ahern, nor most party leaders, North or South, want to see any groups expelled from the discussions. But at first light on Monday, everyone should be obliged to call a halt to pretence, renew support for the Mitchell Principles and press ahead with unambiguous negotiations.
In the meantime, will someone remind Mr David Andrews how out of date he sounds when he claims, as in RTE's recent programme on the Civil War, that Fianna Fail is "better on the North, better on the whole concept of Ireland" than anyone else, particularly Fine Gael.
He may have forgotten that Fine Gael-led governments negotiated the power-sharing executive at Sunningdale and the Anglo-Irish Agreement, long seen as a major political and diplomatic achievement. How far from the fears and grief on the streets can a Minister get?