According to Steve Lehto’s book, the SEC report on Tucker was kept secret throughout the trial and Tucker’s counsel were never permitted to see or read it, but it was nonetheless leaked to the media. In fact, Collier’s published a piece criticizing Tucker that contained leaked information about the SEC findings. Additionally, Reader’s Digest reprinted this article, leading to even more bad press for Tucker. Finally, on January 22, 1950, after 28 hours of deliberation, the jury found all defendants to be “not guilty” on all charges. Although Tucker had won the trial, the Tucker Corporation, which had lost its factory, was now heavily in debt, facing numerous lawsuits from irate Tucker dealers, and essentially bankrupt.
In the early 1950s, Tucker looked to return to the auto industry by developing the Carioca sports automobile with help from Brazilian financiers and auto designer Alexis de Sakhnoffsky, according to Ken Gross’ April 2012 article, “Tuckers Soaring 64 Years After Splattering” in Sports Car Market magazine. However, Tucker’s travels to Brazil were plagued by fatigue, and Tucker died from pneumonia as a complication of lung cancer on December 26, 1956.
Regardless of the outcome of the trial, rumors have persisted on the issue of whether Tucker actually planned to build a new automobile and market it, or whether the whole operation was bogus, created with the express intention of obtaining money from unsuspecting investors. So, was Preston Tucker a visionary or a villain? Ultimately, I believe Preston Tucker was a great salesman who may not have been quite as skilled at running an entire business; an “idea man” who didn’t take adequate time to consider the logistics. Between the confusion over the car’s design due to multiple designers working on the car at different times, many features that were promised early for the car that never materialized, the troubled premiere of the car, and Tucker’s innovative/suspicious approaches to raising capital, it’s easy to see why his venture was viewed with skepticism.
In addition, Tucker’s timing was not great. The SEC at the time was on alert after small automaker Kaiser-Frazer had recently received millions of dollars in grants for the development of a new car but wasted the money. While Tucker did not accept any funding from the government, small, up-and-coming automakers were subject to intense SEC scrutiny at the time. Furthermore, Tucker believed that the Big Three auto manufacturers were impeding his attempts to produce his cars, as he subtly hinted at in “An Open Letter from Preston Tucker” that was published in many newspapers on June 15, 1948. I won’t go so far as to say that a Big Three conspiracy was at work to stop Preston Tucker, but it’s certainly not implausible that the Big Three were applying political pressure to put an end to his production.
Finally, of the 51 Tucker 48s that were completely or partially built, 47 are still in existence, with photos and the location of each car tracked on the Tucker Gallery at the Tucker Automobile Club of America’s website. Other car manufacturers later adopted many of the engineering and safety features introduced on the Tucker 48. In addition, as of October 31, 1948, the company had $16 million in assets and only $2 million in liabilities. I believe that the longevity of the existing Tucker 48s, the influence they had on other car makers, and the financial solvency of the Tucker Corporation proves that Tucker was a visionary, fully intended to build these innovative cars, and had the means to do so.