William F. Pepper

Interesting evidence and an intriguing theory, but very poorly organized, on certain details weakly supported and lacking in sources that can be produced, and presented in a writing style that can only be described as wretched.

Pepper’s garbled prose sometimes makes it hard to know what he is claiming. For a lawyer, there is a surprising sloppiness and inattention to detail (his editor and publisher share the blame) and his attempts to write narrative prose are inept.

He inflates the potential of the Poor People’s Campaign that King was organizing in 1968 and ignores the many significant challenges to King’s leadership that he was facing at the end of his life in what seems to be an attempt to make his theory more plausible.

His very alarmist 2008 afterword is also sloppy; e.g. it calls the 2002 Maher Arar case, which surfaced in late 2003 “the most famous recent case” of rendition and ignores the substantial pushback that has occurred.

However, Pepper has pursued this case with great courage and deserves the gratitude of citizens.… (mere)