Capote fell in love with Perry, if not sexually, then artistically because Perry was everything he wasn't. A pretentious artist. Capote felt that Perry was the key to the book, and in the book, and in both movies, Dick's side to the story is NEVER told. Never, ever, ever. And in In Cold Blood, Dick says things like "We're gonna leave no witnesses" and so many things that only Perry would have known, or… made up. Everything is told by Perry to Capote. NOTHING is told by Dick to Capote. It's pretty weird, but… that's that.
The Fearmakers Blog
https://thefearmakers.blogspot.com/

he fell head over heels with Perry, not Dick. so Perry was the AS TOLD BY in the book and it flowed through into both movies ICB and Capote. Perry killed the entire family at gun point but Dick is still the main villain. it's kind of like Manson. he's blamed for almost the entire two murder sprees, so it's a wonder all the real killers didn't just get out of jail in 1969.
The Fearmakers Blog
https://thefearmakers.blogspot.com/

That's why ICB is classified as a true crime "novel". In movie terms, we would say it was "inspired by true events".

but he did NOT get Dick's side of the story.
The Fearmakers Blog
https://thefearmakers.blogspot.com/

That's fascinating Qoaa, thanks.
Limit of the Willing Suspension of Disbelief: directly proportional to its awesomeness.

There's a thousand of those.
In some cases Capote invented entire scenes, like when he has one of the officers visit Hickok's parents alone. At some point the police did talk to the parents, but the dramatic confrontation that the book describes is total fiction.

yup ole "Gonzo" ate his Gun in the end. As for Capote, we read ICB in HIgh School. In "In Cold Blood" Perry says before Kansas kills him "I hope you send me to a better place than I came from" but ICF says he said "I had a lot to contribute." A picture of Nancy Clutter shows her as a homely looking girl in a leather jacket, not like Capote depicted her in the book.

This message has been deleted.

100 percent accurate? Lol.
He was a chronic liar but you take him at his word that he was proud of how accurate it was. That's your reasoning. Makes no sense.
Human psychology at work. We don't like to let the truth get in the way of a good story.
Google it. Read some articles about what investigators found when they looked at the police records and even Capote's own notes.

Well, you're only partly correct.
Capote was a chronic liar. He lied about his I.Q. He lied about his petty Southern origins. He lied about his interactions with celebrities and fellow writers.
When someone asked Gore Vidal about his death he said, "he ran out of lies."
BUT evidently he was 100% correct about the details that he wrote for In Cold Blood. He took an enormous amount of pride in his accuracy about the case, and I think that I remember that he offered a huge sum of money to anyone who could find an inaccuracy in his writing.
I also remember that someone corrected him on one thing, and it was a meaningless detail like some woman walked two miles to the post office, not one

It's been pretty well documented that Capote just made a lot of stuff up. And I'm not talking about dramatizing things that really happened based on his interviews and other evidence. Just flat out making up entire scenes.
I'm not saying people shouldn't read the book. A lot of it is true, but I look at it like I would a movie version. It's "based on a true story", but not what I'd call true non fiction.