Hickock’s confession

Hickock’s confession is the signed accusation Richard Hickock made after his arrest in Las Vegas: he said Perry Smith had killed the Clutter family. Its importance lies both in what it alleged—that a robbery for an expected safe had ended in four murders—and in the shifting accounts that later complicated the allocation of responsibility between the two men.

Origin and Claims

The confession grew out of a robbery plan shaped by information Dick had obtained from Floyd Wells, who had once worked for Herbert William Clutter. Wells said Dick repeatedly asked about the family, the farm, the house’s layout, and whether Herbert William Clutter kept a safe. Wells recalled Dick describing a plan to rob the house and kill witnesses; he had dismissed the talk as prison boasting until news of the murders made it seem alarmingly specific.

Perry Smith later described Dick’s pitch as a supposedly certain score. Dick drew a diagram of the Clutter home and said a wall safe held large sums of cash. The two discussed how many people they might encounter and how to avoid identification; Perry said he wanted the money and hoped they could avoid violence, while Dick rejected his suggestion that they wear masks. The radio account of Hickock’s confession said the men expected a safe containing at least ten thousand dollars, found none, and then tied up and shot the family. The expected safe was thus central to the confessed robbery’s stated purpose, even though it was not there.

Arrest and Public Disclosure

In Las Vegas, Hickock signed a confession that accused Perry of committing all four murders. Investigators also referred to an hour-long recorded confession, repeating Hickock’s claim that he had tried to stop Perry but was afraid Perry would shoot him too. The distinction matters: the account reached others through investigators’ reports and broadcasts, while Perry had not yet confirmed or denied participating in the crime.

The accusation became public through a radio report heard at a Garden City café. It described the men’s expectation of finding a safe, the binding and shooting of the family, and the officers’ refusal to identify which man had fired the shots. The report specified that these were Hickock’s version of events, not an agreed account. It also said Perry had asked to see his partner’s statement and that the request had been rejected. The confession therefore entered the public narrative as a forceful accusation, but not as a jointly verified reconstruction.

Disputed Responsibility

During questioning on the return journey to Kansas, investigators used Hickock’s recorded claims to confront Perry. Perry reacted strongly to the implication that Dick had been too frightened to resist him, but his response did not settle who had killed the Clutters. He then recounted the plan from his own perspective: Dick had recruited him, supplied the account of the supposed safe, and wanted a large score; Perry said he had wanted the money and Mexico but hoped to avoid violence.

Perry’s later account placed responsibility in a different, more complicated pattern. He acknowledged killing the family, while also saying Dick helped him, held the flashlight, picked up the shells, and had originated the plan. He said he had initially blamed Dick for some of the killings because he wanted to punish him for appearing cowardly, and later sought to correct that account partly out of consideration for Dick’s parents. The conflicting versions make the confession important evidence of what Hickock alleged, not a final resolution of every act or motive.

Trial and Narrative Consequences

At trial, Alvin Adams Dewey publicly described material from Perry’s confession, including Perry’s claim that he had shot the whole family. Dewey also testified that Perry said he had stopped Dick from assaulting Nancy Clutter. Hickock had not known that Perry had told investigators about the proposed assault or that Perry had offered to take sole responsibility for the shootings. Dewey’s testimony thus revealed that the accounts were not simply a stable accusation and denial: each man’s version shifted, and information withheld from one partner could emerge in court to reshape the other’s understanding.

The confession gave the investigation an early, legible account of the crime and helped explain the men’s intended robbery, but its certainty was qualified by the source and by subsequent disclosures. By separating Hickock’s accusation from Perry’s later admissions and revisions, the narrative presents confession not as a transparent record but as a consequential statement made amid self-protection, blame, and concern for family. Its public force exceeded its power to settle the central question of responsibility.