In cold blood was written by Truman capote in 1965 detailing the brutal 1959 murders of Herbert clutter, his wife and their two kids Nancy and Kenyan clutter. Truman capote tries to remain unbiased, in his book In cold blood by attempting to counter his affinity to the killers (i.e. Perry and dick) but when you read this novel his bias becomes apparent due to his disdain for the death penalty. Shown by pointing out his belief that dick and Perry’s trial was unfair and unjust it begins with capote pointing out the killers defense lawyers lack of enthusiasm.
Dick hickock’s involvement in the clutter murders began when he solicited Perry’s help in planning the crimes, so he is the mastermind of this heinous crime and is just as guilty, if…show more content… Hickock keeps on coming with excuses for his acts, when he’s questioned by investigaters he blames it all on perry then when they question perry he says he only killed the men. After dicks side of the story is disproved by perry side of the story. He changes his excuse saying he was there but that he was forced into doing it even though he came up with the plan.
At the end of the day although the prosecutor and dick hickock make valid point about the appropriate punishment for the crime, the prosecutor comment that dick death sentence should not be contingent on who actually pulled the trigger is a more valid statement while we may never know who pulled the trigger on the clutters, whether it be Perry side of the story or dick’s side of the story. We do know that dick is just as guilty as perry if not more, due to his involvement to the crime. He came up with the plan to rob and kill the clutters from his prison cell, he didn’t try to not kill the clutters when Perry asked him to leave after they didn’t find the money he stayed, he was always the brains in the group so the decision to get rid of the witnesses was