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

It's interesting, yet farcical, that the story goes that Oswald asked to change his shirt, and that this was the reason for the delay in making the transfer. So, it was his own fault that "Ruby" got the opportunity to shoot him. That's basically the message.

But, it's ridiculous. First, Oswald didn't change his shirt. You have to have a shirt in order to change a shirt, and he didn't have one. Recall that they took his shirt away from him on the first day. It was immediately after his first interview with Fritz that his shirt was confiscated.

What legal grounds did they have to take his shirt? It wasn't a murder weapon, was it? Did it have any bearing on the crime? Officially, they took his shirt to test it for fibers to see if they could find his shirt fibers on the rifle. But, can you think of any other case in the history of law enforcement in which that was done? That a suspect's clothes were taken to see if fibers from the clothes were left on the rifle? I strongly suspect that this was the only time it happened.

And why didn't they replace his shirt right away? It was, after all, late November in Dallas. And even though it got warm in the sun that afternoon, it was chilly in the morning, and I suspect that it got chilly later on as well. Oswald did wear a jacket to work that day. And if you look at the images from the hallway, you see all these detectives and FBI agents in shirts and hats and jackets and ties, and they didn't look like they were uncomfortable with all those clothes stacked on. So, Oswald was left with nothing but a flimsy, threadbare t-shirt. And he wasn't offered any other clothes until Sunday morning? That's cruel and unusual punishment in my book.

And remember that Oswald was very lean- without any body fat, to speak of. And such a person gets chilled very easily. I'm such a person, and I chill very easily. If it gets cooler than 76 degrees in the house, I feel cold.  

And they ended up claiming to find his shirt fibers on the butt of the rifle, but you really should read the testimony of the FBI agent who had to testify to that to the Warren Commission because it's full of disclaimers and doubts and what-ifs and qualifyings- as though he really didn't enjoy having to say it. He refused to claim certainty that those were Oswald's shirt fibers on the rifle.

And, the whole idea is pretty preposterous. If it were realistic, then it would be done routinely in law enforcement; they would confiscate the clothes of shooters to try to match fibers to fibers on the gun. And even in the case of a handgun, even though you're not bracing it against your shoulder, you might have it in your pocket or you might brush it against your sleeve. Hey, if the butt of a rifle can have shirt fibers that stick to it, then the sky's the limit. Yet, can you think of any other case, in the entire history of law enforcement, in which a person's clothes were confiscated on that basis? And let's remember something: at the time they confiscated his shirt, they had no knowledge about shirt fibers being on the rifle. That came later. 

So really, it was all smoke and mirrors. They really had to get that shirt away from Oswald because that was the shirt he wore in the doorway, and they wanted to disassociate Oswald from that shirt as much as possible.  But, of course, it's the same shirt, and it's the same man. That is resolved beyond doubt. 

Then, secondly, the whole ragged t-shirt look made him look like a derelict, a bum. And that's how they wanted the public to perceive him. And then, TIME magazine got their artist to add a deranged look to his face, and presto, you've got yourself a lone nut killer.

Really, the framing of Oswald has got to be one of the most vicious, diabolical, and Machiavellian things that government and media have ever done, and they've done a lot of vicious. diabolical, and Machiavellian things. 

And supposedly, Oswald picked the black sweater to wear that last morning of his life. Hmm. Really? I wonder how that went down. Did they present him with several sweaters and say, take your pick? 

Well, I rather doubt. You see, I am a VERY cynical and suspicious person. Did you know that about me? It's true. And I think that Oswald was given a black sweater because it created a lot of contrast between him and Detective James Leavelle who was wearing his cream-colored Easter bunny suit. And that helped the shooter to point his gun where it had to go.

Look at that picture above. Do you really think it's possible that Detective L.C. Graves did not see "Ruby" that is Bookhout? There is a thing called peripheral vision. Even when you're looking straight ahead, do you know how far out to the side you can see? It is practically 90 degrees. And it's blurry out there, I admit, but it's also very sensitive to movement, and "Ruby" was moving. So, I am sure that Graves was just pretending not to see him. And in the case of Leavelle, he actually looked the other way, to his right, at the last second so as not to see him.

Then, they did that ridiculous fakery of Leavelle putting his hand in Oswald's pants as they were walking along- another first for law enforcement. They had to fake it, frame by frame, and some of the frames came out ridiculous.

What the hell is that supposed to be? You see Leavelle was a super-hero. He was Elastic Man. His skeleton wasn't made of bones; it was made of rubber. That is actually supposed to be his forearm coming over and with his hand inside Oswald's pants. But, long bones can't do that. That is certainly enough torsion to break the bones of the forearm. They snap just like chicken bones. You can't do it. Understand? It's fake. 

This thing is going to blow up. The societal obtuseness and willful blindness, about Kennedy's killing as well as Oswald's, which led Americans to accept this crap, can't last forever. Reality is going to rub their noses in the shit. The whole story, from Kennedy to Oswald, is a tower of lies. And it is going to fall hard. And there is NOTHING that anybody can do to stop it.