Let's consider a list of beliefs that are inherent to being an Oswald defender. I mean being a real Oswald defender. In other words, they are subsumed under the definition of Oswald defender. They are givens. They are musts. They are built-in to the term: Oswald defender.
1) That Oswald was innocent, and not just innocent, but framed and innocent. There is quite a lot of evidence against him, including physical evidence, but because he was innocent, it was all phony, planted evidence and phony, fabricated stories. All of it has got to be fake if Oswald was innocent.
2) For instance, if Oswald was innocent, then the paper bag for the rifle that they found in the Sniper's Nest had to be planted. It could not possibly be Oswald's.
3) And since Oswald said he ordered no rifle and owned no rifle, then the whole story of him bringing the rifle to work must be false, including everything that Buell Frazier said about it.
4) And since the Backyard photos feature him displaying that rifle, then those photos must be fake. So, if you are an Oswald defender- a real Oswald defender- you must believe in photographic alteration in the JFK assassination. And since the Backyard photos existed on the day of the assassination, they must have been made before the assassination. And that means that the idea and the effort to make fake photos for the JFK assassination got started before the day of the assassination. This is very important because if they had the mindset to falsify photos before the assassination, then how could they not have had that mindset to falsify photos after the assassination?
5) Since Oswald denied going to Mexico City, then you must believe that he didn't go there because he wasn't accused of committing any crimes in Mexico City, and if he had really gone there, he'd have known that they could easily confirm it so that it would be futile to lie about it. He had no reason to lie about it since he was not being accused of committing any crimes in Mexico City. So, if he went there, he would have said so.
6) Since Oswald didn't order or own a rifle, then he could not possibly have shot at General Walker. The whole story of him having done that must be a despicable lie.
7) Since Marina Oswald told the Warren Commission that Oswald shot at Walker, intended to shoot at Nixon, went to Mexico City, and posed for her with the rifle to take the Backyard photos- all of which was utterly impossible- it means that authorities somehow got Marina to say those false, outrageous things either by corrupting her with bribes (she did receive a tremendous amount of money in 1964 dollars) or by brainwashing her with CIA mind control techniques. Or, they did a combination of both.
8) And since the things listed above were certainly false, it is also very likely that other things Marina said about Oswald were also false, such as, that he administered beatings to her and that he tried to get her to join him in an armed hijacking of a commercial airliner to divert it to Cuba.
9) And, it also means that other witnesses must have lied about their experiences with Oswald, such as George DeMohrenschildt and his wife Jeanne, who spoke of the rifle and seeing the rifle. (Although George's tale about it was strange in that he said that once he and his wife were visiting the Oswalds and discussing Oswald's rifle, and his wife got up to go into the next room to see it, but he George did not, despite being a gun collector himself. So, his claim was that he knew of the rifle but never laid eyes on it.)
10) Since the stories of Oswald shooting at Walker, Kennedy, and Tippit are all lies, then it follows that Oswald trying to shoot at Officer McDonald must also be a lie since Oswald denied it and since McDonald changed his story about what happened, and there isn't one bit of corroborating evidence. For instance, the story was at first that Oswald fired but the gun misfired. Then, an FBI expert said that there was no misfire. So then McDonald made it that the gun didn't fire because he wedged the web of his hand into the trigger space- which he never said on the first day. Oswald denied even resisting arrest, and I'm pretty sure that shooting at a police officer constitutes resisting arrest. Oswald said he didn't shoot at anybody, which a real Oswald defender would believe.
There are more things that I could add, but 10 is a nice round number, so we'll leave it at that. If you are real Oswald defender, you have to accept all of them. And, it's not because I say so. It's because Logic says so. It's because Reality says so.
So, anyone who crosses the line on any of those points is NOT a real Oswald defender. They are a phony Oswald defender. And there are, unfortunately, a lot of phony Oswald defenders. But, this is a way by which to identify them.