Oswald in the doorway: the blog of the Oswald Innocence Campaign, by Ralph Cinque

As I have said, there are people who dispute the official story of the JFK assassination without defending Oswald, such as Dr. Cyril Wecht. 

But, anyone who disputes the official story by denying Oswald's guilt has a strict obligation to establish Oswald's whereabouts during the crime. If you don't do it, you can't be an Oswald defender. 

Even if you think there were no known shots taken from the 6th floor, Oswald still could have been up there. Maybe he shot and missed. Or maybe he was up there as a shooter but he chickened out at the last second. Or maybe he just felt that he didn't have a high-percentage shot, that he just didn't get a good enough view of Kennedy in his scope to pull the trigger. He still could have been up there. He still could have been a conspirator.

So, if you just want to be a conspiracy advocate, fine. You don't have to defend Oswald. But, if you claim to be an Oswald defender, if you claim that he was innocent, then you have to account for his whereabouts during the shooting- and there is no getting around that. 

And, if you are going to defend him, defend him against the charge that he was some wild, weird, wacky guy who would rather do anything than view the President of the United States, including doing nothing. Denounce the charge that he was so anti-social that he would rather hide in a closet than be out amongst people taking in a spectacular, historical event. Oppose the denigration of Oswald, not only as a murderer but as a psycho. He was not a psycho.  That's all part of the framing of Oswald, and if you are going to defend him, you must defend him against that too.