This article explores the political, strategic and emotional issue of victim groups deciding to continue or discontinue central components of a justice campaign in the aftermath of receiving ‘truth’. Drawing on in-depth interviews, the article focuses on relatives and other stakeholders’ varying positions on (dis)continuing the annual Bloody Sunday commemoration march after the publication of the Report of the Bloody Sunday Inquiry and the UK Prime Minister’s apology for the massacre. I demonstrate that there has emerged an, at times, acrimonious schism between those who feel the apology and report were sufficient to stop the march and those who believe them to be insufficient. Thus, while much of the literature on political apology evaluates its effects on the dyadic relationship between victim and perpetrator, this article develops Sara Ahmed’s concept of ‘overing’ to demonstrate that the ostensible moment of truth can create unanticipated and deleterious intra-victim tensions. The article concludes by suggesting practical measures emerging from the findings that other justice campaigns may consider.

本文探讨了受害群体的政治，战略和情感问题，他们决定在接受“真相”后继续或中断司法运动的核心组成部分。在深入访谈中，本文重点介绍了亲戚和其他利益相关者在（血腥）周年纪念游行发表后继续（每年）举行的血腥星期日纪念日游行和英国首相大屠杀的道歉之后的不同立场。我证明，在感到道歉和举报足以阻止游行的人与认为道歉和举报不足的人之间，有时会出现激烈的分裂。因此，尽管许多关于政治道歉的文献都评估了其对受害者与犯罪者之间二元关系的影响，本文发展了萨拉·艾哈迈德（Sara Ahmed）的“超越”概念，以证明表面上的真实时刻会造成意想不到且有害的受害者内部紧张关系。本文最后提出了一些其他司法运动可能考虑的发现中提出的实际措施。