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

If Ruby was just brought in, as this film implies, he should definitely be wearing his jacket. They were fighting and struggling in the garage, right? And they should have handcuffed Ruby in the garage. There is NO EXCUSE for them not doing so. But, the story became that as soon as they got him inside the jail office, then they handcuffed him. Detective McMillon said that it was his handcuffs that went on Ruby. No explanation was given as to why he didn't apply them in the garage, and the WC questioner didn't ask him. 

But, McMillon certainly did not say that they helped Ruby out of his jacket first. So, at the point in time that this was, Ruby should definitely be wearing his jacket, and yet, he's not. He is only in a shirt. And yes, the shirt was presumably torn, as in: the buttons turn off. Why else would it look that way? OR, are we supposed to assume that they helped him out of his jacket and then unbuttoned his shirt? Are we not supposed to assume that the arrangement of his shirt that we see there was spontaneous? So, the idea has to be that the buttons got torn off during the fracas. Right? But, that's impossible too because he was wearing a jacket at the time. His jacket protected his shirt. So, how could his buttons get torn off? What is obvious is that that was an arrangement that they imposed on him, like an actor walking out onto a stage or into the scene of a movie. Lights, camera, action. That's his costume, and they arranged it. Ruby was taken up to the 5th floor, and then he was brought down from the 5th floor, just for this, just to be paraded around in front of the camera. This was the "switch" in the bait and switch.