The critic of the Warren Commission here examines New Orleans D.A. Jim Garrison's evidence, methods of inquiry, psychology, and uses of public opinion--and rejects the Garrison investigation. Epstein's first book, Inquest, began as a master's thesis on the ""question of establishing the truth about an event in a charged environment."" The Warren Commission's prejudice against the idea of conspiracy, he concluded, led to an orderly but superficial investigation. Subjecting Garrison to the same scrutiny, he finds that Garrison errs in the other direction--his ""phobic concern with secrecy"" and his tendency to try his case in the press led him to chase windmills, in a highly unorthodox manner. Epstein runs through most of the Garrison data--both on the alleged anti-Castro conspiracy against President Kennedy and the ""second conspiracy"" of silence against the D.A.--and, generally, he destroys its credibility. Epstein, of course, does not show that there was no possibility of conspiracy--rather he discredits Garrison. The book, then, is a second demonstration of his earlier thesis, i.e. that anticipated consequences greatly prejudice the conduct of investigations. The book is also a reminder that the full facts of the assassination are yet to be found.