This chapter examines not only the development of internal and public justifications but also their legacy. It recalls how as the definition of torture was transformed into a battleground between intelligence services and human rights bodies, so the issue of the consequences of losing the struggle became apparent to the intelligence services. The chapter analyses how in contrast to a strict policy of maximization of plausible deniability, the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) developed a systematic public relations plan to justify its illegal programme of detention. It argues that the debate on torture and the use of violence was settled in such a way that it left very little possibility for the Barack Obama administration to consider the question differently. The chapter underlines how the scholastic arguments impacted the debate on torture and were successfully retrieved by the CIA and the executive while they were looking for justification and immunity from prosecution.