READ MORE: Crewe murders: Profile of the killer
Criticism of Mr Adams-Smith's reports from the police team adds to earlier criticism of the way issues were pushed and new ideas floated without the barrister having access to all the evidence which had been before the courts.
But the criticism from the Solicitor-General is new - and an incredible warning which Sir Robert pushed past to give Mr Thomas the pardon which was quickly becoming a public cause celebre.
It is revealed in the 648-page police analysis of the evidence used to produce the review report which was unveiled in July this year. The police analysis was released to the Herald through the Official Information Act.
The analysis document revealed the earliest criticism of Mr Adams-Smith's reports was from Mr Savage, the Solicitor General from 1970-1980, who had been asked by Sir Robert to review the QC's work and give him options.
Mr Savage said Sir Robert could do nothing, he could refer the case with its report back to the Court of Appeal, or he could grant a pardon.
He told the Prime Minister: "I feel to pardon or release Thomas on the basis of this report would be to make a mockery of our system of justice."
CREWE REVIEW: The full report
He said there was "nothing new" in the two reports which had not been before the courts.
Mr Savage said the barrister had admitted not investigating "all aspects of the case". "To substitute his opinion ... for that of the juries and the courts would in my opinion be quite wrong."
He said Sir Robert's other options were to refer it to the courts, which would allow the Government to base further action on a court decision and "not that of one man who, of necessity, could not hear the opposing points of view argued".
He said the most "justified" response would be to take no action. He also suggested Sir Robert publicly announce it would be up to Mr Thomas to take the reports to the Governor-General to ask for a pardon.
Mr Savage's opinion for Sir Robert was dated December 10, 1979.
Exactly one week later Mr Thomas was pardoned. He was paid $950,000 compensation. The subsequent royal commission of inquiry into the conviction found that Mr Thomas should never have been arrested.
The 2014 review team's analysis of evidence said Mr Adams-Smith's lines of inquiry - and those he failed to pursue - were "concerning" because they became the basis for the pardon.
It mentioned the timing of Sir Robert's appointment of Mr Adams-Smith to inquire into the murder, with the announcement coming just weeks before the 1978 election.
The analysis also found it most probable the firearm taken from the Thomas farm was the murder weapon, and traced other key pieces of evidence to the property, but finally conceded it was likely planted evidence had been used to secure the convictions in the 1970s.
The analysis also found the original police investigation so flawed that it was unlikely the killer would ever be brought to justice.
Mr Thomas would not comment but his brother Des, who has spoken for the family, said there was a strong case to be made that Sir Robert had inside knowledge.
He said there was evidence Len Johnston, one of the detectives implicated in the planting of evidence, had confessed on his deathbed in the late 1970s. The story - ruled out as true by the police review - saw the confession to his vicar passed to a bishop, who passed it to Sir Robert.
Des Thomas said the story was credible despite police dismissing it because it explained why Sir Robert appointed Anglican Archbishop the Most Rev Allen Johnston as one of the royal commissioners.
"What did Muldoon know in order to get Adams-Smith to do the report? Did Len Johnston confess on his deathbed?"
