This is James Bookhout's report about Oswald's first interrogation. But, note the date of it: November 25. So, Oswald was already dead- never to contradict him. So, Bookhout could say anything he want, and he did. It's full of lies.
But fortunately, he started with a truth: that Oswald said that he owned no rifle. You can't overstate the importance of that. Oswald denied- not just shooting JFK with a rifle- but even owning the rifle. John Armstrong is right: the paper trail to Klein's Sporting Goods in Chicago is totally fabricated and fictitious.
Then, instead of stating where Oswald said he was AT THE TIME OF THE SHOOTING, which is what mattered, Bookhout stated where Oswald said he was AT THE TIME OF THE SEARCH OF THE TSBD. So, how could he skip something as important as Oswald's alibi? Because it was his alibi, his true alibi, that he was out with Bill Shelley in front.
Then, Bookhout made it that Oswald had already purchased the Coke before Baker confronted him. We know that isn't true. Both Baker and Truly said that he had nothing in his hands. Both of them said, specifically, that he had no Coke. So, was Bookhout lying about that? Well, not necessarily. Maybe there was confusion, that is, miscommunication. Maybe Oswald brought up the Coke but didn't make it clear that he got it afterwards. I can't think of any reason why Oswald would have lied about it. But, I can't be sure that Bookhout was up to no good in putting it the way that he did.
But in the next thing, Bookhout was clearly lying. Oswald did not say that he he lunch after the assassination. I don't believe for one second that Bookhout was confused about that.
Then, Bookhout has Oswald, after eating lunch, going outside and standing around talking with Bill Shelley for five or ten minutes, and that is preposterous. First, Shelley wasn't there at that time. He left the entrance immediately after the shooting with Lovelady. They went to the railroad tracks. And then they circled back to the back door and reentered the building there. Then they were guarding the freight elevator and other stuff, and there is NO CHANCE he was out front when Oswald left for home.
And second, there wasn't time. If Oswald ate lunch after the assassination, and then chewed the cud with Shelley for 10 minutes out front, how could he possibly get home by 1:00? It's preposterous.
So, why did Bookhout say it? He said it because he was trying to whitewash Oswald's statement about "out with Bill Shelley in front" which referred to DURING the assassination, not afterwards. That was OSWALD'S ALIBI, and Bookhout, being a lawyer, knew the importance of an alibi, and this was his way of burying Oswald's. And, he even compounded it by saying that Oswald detailed his conversation with Shelley, making it that Shelley said that they wouldn't be resuming work that day, which led to Oswald leave for home.
And really, he was trying to make Oswald out to be a liar, knowing that Shelley would deny it all. But, the one who was lying was Bookhout. He really was an evil, dastardly liar. If there's a Hell, he's burning there.