What exactly was "Ruby" doing during the scuffle? Jim Leavelle claimed that after shooting Oswald, Ruby tried to shoot him. And that it was only the swift action of LC Graves that saved his life.
So, why wasn't Ruby charged with the attempted murder of a police officer? Doesn't everything counts? I thought it did. So, why did they overlook that? Of course, we can't see that happening. We can't see or detect any hostile action on "Ruby's" part after the shooting of Oswald.
So, what exactly was "Ruby" doing during the struggle with police? How was he resisting? What was the nature of the struggle? Was he kicking? They had his arms, so he wasn't punching. Was he biting? Was he spitting? What was he doing?
And how long would it take those big men to subdue that little guy? At this point right here, isn't it over for him? Isn't he powerless at this point? And remember who these men were: they were police officers and detectives. And remember: you don't become a detective without first being a regular police officer. And police officers are trained to subdue violent people; to subdue them quickly; and to subdue them soundly, and with authority.
So, shouldn't it have reached finality right here at this juncture? And what did finality mean? Finality meant getting the man in handcuffs. And think about what happened inside the jail office: they got him in handcuffs. And then, from all accounts, it was over. Ruby didn't keep resisting once he was in cuffs. He didn't spit. He didn't bite. He didn't try to bash his head into anybody. He was pacified. And that is usually the case, that once the offender is cuffed, he no longer engages in any combative behavior. In a word, he give up.
For one thing, when the cuffs are behind your back, they are often uncomfortable. Oswald complained that they were uncomfortable, and they moved them to the front. I suppose a really hostile person could keep fighting in handcuffs. Or he could just refuse to cooperate; not get up; not walk; not do what he was told. But, it is exceedingly rare for that to happen, and it did not happen here.
So, why did they not proceed to finality by taking out handcuffs and cuffing him right there in the midst of what we are seeing above? Why instead was dragging him into the jail office uncuffed seen as a preferred tactic? And who made the decision? Who was in charge? It seems like police officers would instinctively reach for their cuffs in this situation. And consider: Archer reported that once they got inside the jail office that he reached for his cuffs, but McMillon had taken out his cuffs at the same time, and it was McMillon's cuffs that went on Ruby. But, why didn't either or both of them, and the others, for that matter, do that in the garage? What was stopping them? It is inexplicable. It is inexcusable. And it is a smoking gun that this scenario was not what it appeared.
As I watch the KRLD footage, it seems that the length of the scuffle is 15 seconds. That may not seem like much, but considering the overwhelming superiority that the cops had over "Ruby", it's too long. He would not have been able to fight against them for 15 seconds. They would have had no trouble subduing him in less time than that. Look how many of them there were. Look how big they were. And think about the training they had. And think about how futile and pointless Ruby's resistance was. Out of self-preservation, wouldn't he have said, "I give up!"
What happens in the footage is that the mob of cops swarming Ruby drift right towards the Main Street ramp. Then, Graves breaks away, and he has the gun. Then, it's a bunch of veil frames where some suited person is directly in front of the camera blocking the view. And then when it clears, it's pretty much over. You've got detectives with their arms out creating a barrier. There are still a few stragglers going through the door into the office. But, there is no sign of Ruby any more, or Oswald. They have vanished.
The NBC footage is much worse. It's mostly all veil shots, and qualitatively, it is much worse. Why would little KRLD be able to product higher quality footage than mighty NBC?
Folks: it is all a lie. The story is a lie. Every instinct that a cop has, and my father was one for 45 years, would be to cuff the violent offender on the spot- right where he is; not take him somewhere else, let alone drag him through a narrow door without first cuffing him.
It's a lie, a terrible lie. And what it means is that they were all in on it. Every one of those Dallas cops and detectives were in on it, this hoax, this ruse. And some of them are still alive today. I bet they thought that what is happening now was never going to happen. I bet they thought they got away with it, clean away with it, for 50 years. They probably thought the truth was never going to surface. The only disputes and objections that people voiced about the Oswald shooting was whether Ruby really acted alone? Or did the Mob put him up to it? Did he really walk down the ramp, or did somebody open a door for him? There has been plenty of that crap, but nobody but nobody was disputing whether Jack Ruby really did it. But, he did not do it. That was Bookhout not Ruby. And the behavior of all those policemen is absolutely inexcusable, and it makes them culpable. When cops don't act like cops, you know that something is wrong. There is NO WAY that they would have spontaneously dragged him into the jail office without cuffing him first. It must have been all planned ahead of time that that was what they were going to do. They knew exactly what was going to happen, and they knew exactly what they were going to do in response to it.
After all, if it was all spontaneous, then how did they know they were doing that: dragging him into the jail office? There are no reports that anyone yelled, "Let's take him into the jail office." So, how did they know to do it?
They were working together. They were working with "Ruby" too, who was really Bookhout. Their goal after the shooting was to scurry Bookhout out of the garage before he could be seen and recognized. And I mean, of course, before he could ID'd as himself, James Bookhout rather than Jack Ruby. Great care was taken to keep him covered up and to make sure that only back and side views of him were captured on film and in photos.
And when I think about all those testimonies of the cops who were involved, such as Archer, Crady, McMillan, Patrick Dean, and of course Leavelle and Graves; all the lies that they told. Archer said he walked through the door holding Ruby's left arm, and it's not even physically possible- unless they dragged him in backwards. Is that the story?
The police action that we see in that garage after the shooting is not plausible. It is not believable. In fact, the police action we see in that garage before the shooting isn't credible either. Who arranges a spectacle around a man walking 20 feet to get into a car, turning it into a God-damn procession? And who lines the procession with a bevy of cops who turn out to be useless? Who speaks over and over, directly and indirectly through proxies, of the grave danger that Oswald was in of being shot, only for him to get shot as soon as he steps out the door? STOP BELIEVING THIS SHIT! Stop it now! If you won't stop it for Oswald's sake, then stop it for your own sake- for the sake of your own sanity. Because: they are shitting on you with this story of the Oswald shooting. That's what they're doing. You hear me? Have enough self-respect to say that you are not going to take it any more. The official story of the Oswald shooting is just as fake and fraudulent as the official story of the JFK shooting. They are playing you for a fool with both stories, and you need to reject both. Not just one but both. Both stories need to be sternly, soundly, and defiantly rejected.