Groll, Richard C.

English

Via Sapientiae: The Institutional Repository at DePaul University

DePaul Law Review Volume 16 Issue 1 Fall-Winter 1966 Article 25 Epstein: Inquest Richard C. Groll Follow this and additional works at: https://via.library.depaul.edu/law-review Recommended Citation Richard C. Groll, Epstein: Inquest, 16 DePaul L. Rev. 272 (1966) Available at: https://via.library.depaul.edu/law-review/vol16/iss1/25 This Book Reviews is brought to you for free and open access by the College of Law at Via Sapientiae. It has been accepted for inclusion in DePaul Law Review by an authorized editor of Via Sapientiae. For more information, please contact digitalservices@depaul.edu. BOOK REVIEWSInquest. By EDWARD J. EPSTEIN. New York: The Viking Press, 1966. Pp. 156.$5.00.On September 28, 1964, a 469-page document, supplemented by 18 appen-dices, commonly known as the Warren Report was made public. This docu-ment, the hearings and investigation which preceded its publication are the sub-ject of Edward Jay Epstein's Inquest, a book well worth reading.The Warren Report, its 18 appendices and 26 volumes of testimony and ex-hibits resulted from Executive Order #11130 issued by President Lyndon B.Johnson seven days after the assassination of the late President John F. Ken-nedy; the order appointed a Commission "to ascertain, evaluate and report on"the facts of the assassination.' For some 10 months this Commission, consistingof "six men who had distinguished themselves in public life"2 plus a large sup-porting staff, conducted an investigation and held hearings into all elements ofthe assassination.While various purposes were set forth for the creation of the Commission,one purpose appeared to dominate. Allen Dulles stated that a main task for theCommission was to dispel rumors. Senator John Sherman Cooper stated thatone of the Commission's most important functions was "to lift the cloud ofdoubts that had been cast over American institutions. 83 In a clear, crisp andlogical fashion, Mr. Epstein in Inquest points out that while the Warren Reportmay have satisfied many inquiries and accomplished many goals, it certainly didnot set adrift the "cloud of doubts" surrounding the assassination; indeed, theReport, upon close examination, fosters doubt and increases speculation thatsomething more serious and complex than reported was involved.It is clear that most Americans were reasonably convinced in their own mindsthat Lee Harvey Oswald was responsible, at least in part, for the bloody assas-sination of John F. Kennedy.4 However, doubt, question, and speculation aroseas to the full import of the shots fired on Elm Street in Dallas, Texas, on Novem-ber 22, 1963. Speculation rose in intensity when the news was received thatJack Ruby, a Texas saloon keeper, had shot and killed Oswald. Each of us, atone point in time or another, asked-Did Oswald act alone? Was the assassina-tion part of an unreported conspiracy? Today, more than 3 years after the as-sassination and more than 2 years after the completion of the Commission'sinvestigation, the same questions remain totally unanswered; in fact, the inade-quacies of the Warren Report, as pointed out by Mr. Epstein in Inquest, en-hance speculation.In the preface to Inquest, the author states that the primary object of thebook was not the assassination or the Commission, but it attempts to answer thequestion: "How did the Commission go about searching for such an elusive1 EPSTEIN, INQUEST 4 (1966).2 1d.at S. 8 1d. at 33.4 Harris Survey, as reported in the Chicago Daily News, p. 20 (October 3, 1966)reported that 74% of the public believed that Oswald was the assassin. (Poll taken inDecember 1963.)BOOK REVIEWSand many faced quarry as the truth?" 5 The author fulfilled his avowed purposeand the reader will be astounded by the case built by Mr. Epstein, which shat-ters the most fundamental findings of the Commission, and its startling exposureof the total inadequacies of the Commission's investigation.Since the book deals with the activities of the Commission in chronologicalorder, from its first meeting to the ultimate publication of its report, the natureand character of Mr. Epstein's presentation can only be described by example.The example chosen centers on that element of the Commission's product,which the author calls The Dilemma. The problem involves the issue most oftenquestioned by the American public-Was there one or more than one assassin?Early in the investigation, it became clear that it was possible for one and onlyone gunman to have perpetrated the assassination only if President Kennedy andGovernor Connally had been hit by the same bullet.6 J. Lee Rankin, generalcounsel for the Commission, corroborated this assertion by stating: "To saythat they were hit by separate bullets is synonymous with saying that there weretwo assassins." 7Investigation, including a motion picture film, established that the maximumtime that could have elapsed between the time President Kennedy and Gover-nor Connally were shot was about 1.8 seconds. However, it was equally estab-lished that the minimum time in which the involved weapon could have beenfired was 2.3 seconds (excluding the time required to aim). 8 Based on thesefacts, the Warren Report concluded that one shot wounded both men withinthe 1.8 seconds time element; the shot supposedly hit President Kennedy in theback of the neck and exited from him at the throat, then striking Governor Con-nally. This conclusion was supposedly substantiated because there was evidencethat the President sustained a throat wound, which was the exit of the bullet.The F.B.I. report indicated that only two bullets struck the President, one inthe back of the head and with reference to the other bullet stated:Medical examination of the President's body revealed that one of the bullets had enteredjust below his shoulder to the right of the spinal column at an angle of 45 to 60 degreesdownward, that there was no point of exit, and that the bullet was not in the body.9In addition, an F.B.I. Supplemental Report including photographs of the Presi-dent's coat and shirt clearly shows holes in the back about 51 inches below thecollar.'0 It would appear impossible for the bullet to have hit the President inthe back (53l inches below the collar) at an angle of 45 to 60 degrees downwardand at the same time exit at the neck, and yet,' it was this bullet that the Com-mission claims struck both President Kennedy and Governor Connally.. A well recognized national poll taker recently reported that a substantial por-tion of the American public remains unsure as to who was responsible for theassassination of President Kennedy;" a reading of Mr. Epstein's brilliant book,Inquest, will convince you that the position taken by this substantial portion ofthe public is well founded. It is hoped that while this review is only a taste of5 Supra note 1, at xv. 7 Ibid. 9 Id. at 48.6 Supra note 1, at 43. 8 Id. at 45. 'Old. at 56-57.11Harris Survey, supra note 4, stated: "A majority of the public holds the viewthat the full story of the assassination was not contained in the Warren Commissionreport." (Poll taken Sept. 1966.)DE PAUL LAW REVIEWthe analysis of the Commission's investigation and findings as presented by Mr.Epstein, that this taste will whet the appetite and encourage all to read Inquest.RicHARD C. GROLL*Assistant Professor of Law, De Paul University; J.D. cum laude, Loyola University,LL.M., Northwestern University.In Cold Blood. By TRUMAN CAPOTE. New York: Random House Publishers,Inc. 1966. Pp. 343. $5.95.At this stage of the game, no reviewer of In Cold Blood need worry aboutrevealing too much of the plot. After the book was initially serialized in theNew Yorker last fall, it was published in full-length form and was extensivelyreviewed. Newsweek devoted a cover story to it, as did Life a lengthy illus-trated article. A paper-back release is planned, fifteen translations are beingmade, and the movie rights have already been sold. The New York Timesestimates that the author will glean upwards of $2,000,000 for his efforts.The story opens one Saturday in November of 1959, when the Clutter familyof Holcomb, Kansas,-a typical family in a typical small farm town-werebrutally murdered by two sadistic young parolees. There was no motive forthe murders and almost no clues. Shortly thereafter Truman Capote arrivedon the scene to cover the story for the New Yorker and painstakingly began col-lecting every scrap of information about the Clutter family that he couldelicit from the shocked townspeople. Seven weeks thereafter the killers wereapprehended, and Capote extended his in-depth coverage to them and continuedtaking what would eventually amount to 6,000 pages of notes. By the timethe two killers were executed some five years and five months later, he hadspent hundreds of hours in their company and had talked to just about everyliving person who had ever been closely connected with them or theirvictims.Capote skillfully draws in-depth character portraits of the main protagonists:Herbert William Clutter, the little loved though most respected citizen, apious Methodist and prominent Republican who had little regard for thoseof other beliefs; his wife Bonnie, a semi-invalid subject to nervous depression;their fifteen-year-old son Kenyon, a quiet but intelligent youngster; theirseventeen-year-old daughter Nancy, charming, enthusiastic, innocent, every-one's favorite; Richard Hickock, a resentful petty criminal, bright but emo-tionally twisted and sadistic; and Perry Smith, whose arrest record beganwhen he was only eight, with a deformed body, an almost unbelievably miser-able childhood, and a desire to "make somebody pay"-all are unforgettablyetched in the reader's memory. Capote also traces the killers' month of aim-less wanderings, in stolen cars or hitchhiked rides, to Mexico, Florida, andLas Vegas, a trail of cheap hotels, bad checks, and sexual fantasies. Equally welldone are those whom the killers meet-a seventy-year-old blonde in high-heeled gold leather sandals in a rundown Las Vegas motel, a twelve-year-oldboy who is walking through the South with his dying grandfather, a travelingsalesman whom they casually plan to kill but who is spared by chance. Somescenes are indelible, such as Richard Hickock swerving out of his way to

Epstein:  Inquest

https://via.library.depaul.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=3195&context=law-review

Epstein: Inquest

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

Via Sapientiae: The Institutional Repository at DePaul University