This is the account of UPI reporter Terrence McGarry on what he saw at the Oswald shooting. I suggest you read it first because what follows is my point by point critique of what he said.
He said that most of the uniformed officers carried 12 gauge riot guns. Here is a picture of one.
But, we don't see that weapon or any weapon in any of the films, except for "Ruby's" pistol.
Next, he described the shooter as "short and balding." But, Jack Ruby was a 5' 8 1/2" and it was 1963, when men, in general, were shorter. And the shooter had on a Fedora hat, worn low on his head. So, how would he know that the man was balding? And the context in which he said it was that "the short, balding man in the brown suit raced right past him." So, how would he know that he was balding? And if you saw this guy, would you say he was balding?
He said that when Oswald collapsed to the floor, he wound up with his left arm across his middle. How? How can that possibly happen from an unconscious person falling? Either the person, or someone else, would have to place the arm across the abdomen in a conscious act. Otherwise, how would it wind up there?
He said that he saw a policeman crouched at the entrance aiming his gun down the ramp. And then, he claimed to see Oswald and Ruby being dragged away. Dragged? He saw Oswald being dragged away? We were told that he was carried. That's what Leavelle said; that he and another officer carried Oswald inside. When asked who the other officer was, he said he couldn't remember. And that was the day that it happened. Then, we heard from Detective Combest who said that he and Leavelle and also Graves (which was a lie) carried Oswald into the building. He didn't say anything about dragging either. But, McGarry claimed to have seen Oswald being dragged.
Well, if McGarry saw Oswald being dragged, why didn't the cameramen see it? And more important, why didn't their cameras see it? If McGarry could see Oswald being dragged, then the cameras should have seen it as well. Don't you think at least one camera should have seen it? Why is it that all the cameras saw was pandemonium, while McGarry plainly saw Oswald being dragged away?
Then, McGarry claimed to have gotten through the double doors before somebody yelled to close them. Then, he claimed to see both Oswald and Ruby lying on the floor of the jail office with cops huddled around them.
Now, let's talk about this idea of Ruby being on the floor in the jail office. There are multiple reports of Ruby being made to lie on the floor. Why? If he was pushed to the floor, he would have been handcuffed right away, and then, once handcuffed, he would have been stood up. Of course, it raises the whole question of why they didn't do that in the garage. And let's remember what we saw: "Ruby" shot Oswald from the side; then he turned himself so that his back was to the camera, and he was facing Oswald quite directly. And because the Jackson photo was taken that way, many people presume that that was the arrangement when Oswald was shot. It wasn't. Then, after getting his back to the camera, "Ruby" dove into the swarm of police. He went to them. Then we see them heaping upon him, like a pileup in rugby. Never at any time do we see "Ruby" acting hostile or taking any aggressive action whatsoever towards the cops. He seems to be completely at their mercy. But, we quickly lose sight of him.
So, in the midst of all that, was he resisting? Was he fighting? Was he kicking? What was he doing? And how long was he doing it? And once they got inside, was he still fighting and resisting? It's hard to believe because in EVERY image we have of Jack Ruby, he looks as docile as a lamb.
So, according to this account, Ruby was dragged in and made to lie on the floor, and then after some time, he was hoisted up and marched away, to be taken to the elevator and then up to the 3rd floor. So, when did his jacket come off? He was wearing a jacket, remember? So, if this was shortly after they got inside the jail office, what happened to his jacket? And DON'T you dare try to tell me that it came off during scuffle because that is bull shit. You hear me, Backes? Jackets do not come off during scuffles. And since he had his jacket on during the scuffle, how did his shirt get so disheveled? And how, in the midst of that, did his tie stay so tight? His shirt was buttoned originally, right? And he had a jacket on over it, right? They didn't unbutton his shirt there just for show, did they? We're not supposed to believe that they unbuttoned his shirt, are we? So, if they didn't unbutton it, did the buttons get ripped off during the scuffle? But, he had his jacket on the whole time.
Then, McGarry claimed to see Oswald's open wound as the stretcher rolled past, as it was being wheeled out. But, we have images of Oswald on the stretcher, and there is no sign that his entry wound was exposed.
So, what can we make of all this contradiction? In a nutshell, it is the melding of the Bookhout story with the Ruby story, with the reporter acting like the "man on the street" when he was really the mouthpiece for the fascist state.