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

Now, the Idiot Backes uses the word "complicit" which of course doesn't help clarify at all. How were they complicit, Backes?

"Anyone with a working brain who does any work, any reading, on Jack Ruby and how he shot Lee Harvey Oswald knows that the Dallas Police Department was complicit in Oswald's death.  That is the general consensus of everybody I've ever met."  Joseph Backes

"Complicit" means that they must have known that Ruby was going to shoot Oswald, which is pretty damn considering that Ruby, himself, did not know that he was going to shoot Oswald.

And I know that Jim Davidson did not take this photo. I didn't say he did.

Obviously, it was shot from the other direction, so how could Jim Davidson have taken it. That's James Bookhout in the far back, closest to the door- the short guy. Well, Davidson was behind him, and followed him out.

So, Davidson captured Bookhout from behind. I never stated or implied that Jim Davidson took this photo:

But, the point is that Jim Davidson had his camera rolling inside. And when the ambulance attendants arrived and went in to get Oswald, Davidson should have filmed them. Hey! If he could film cops milling around Oswald's body, why couldn't he, and why wouldn't he, film the ambulance attendants attending to Oswald? 

Even if you are going to argue that Oswald's body wouldn't have been seen, even as they were picking him up and putting him on a stretcher, what about the ambulance attendants themselves? Why shouldn't they have been filmed doing it? What was Davidson doing instead at that time? Again: if Davidson could capture cops milling around Oswald's body, why didn't he capture the ambulance attendants attending to Osawld inside the jail office?  There is no excuse for that to be missing.