You can see the frame of the glasses, and you can see the arm or "temple" of the glasses going back to his ear. Here is the link so that you can see it in the film. It's in the CNN version of the Oswald shooting, and it occurs at the 14 second mark.
So, does that settle it? Or does anyone besides Joseph Backes want to keep arguing about it?
OK, so he was wearing sunglasses, which means he's not Jack Ruby since Ruby didn't have sunglasses. And he's not the garage shooter either because the garage shooter had regular glasses.
Those are clear glasses in his pocket, not sunglasses.
So, this guy below was not Jack Ruby, though they've been lying about it for decades. But really, it's just one teensy-weensy lie in the cavalcade of lies that is the official story of the Oswald assassination. But, why would they need such a lie if Ruby was really there?