So, if this guy was honest:
Wouldn't he rip Joseph Backes for his ridiculous claim that the Dallas Police were "complicit" with Ruby in the murder of Oswald? That Fritz moved out of the way and positioned himself to give Ruby a clear shot? It is totally insane. The evidence that Ruby had no intention of shooting Oswald is riveting: the fact that he brought his dog along; the fact that he surely would have gotten there on time, that is, according to the scheduled time. And he would have done plenty more to get things ready for his never return.
And what about Fritz? Was he nuts? He would have had to be to let Ruby fire into Oswald and hope that he hit him without hitting anyone else. Oswald was a skinny guy, and he was the only thing between Leavelle and the bullet. Why would Fritz think that nothing that could go wrong? Why would Fritz trust Ruby?
And, according to Leavelle, after shooting Oswald, Ruby tried to shoot him, that he actually tried to pull the trigger while aiming the gun at him. Of course, that was a lie. We can see with our eyes that that didn't happen. The only thing "Ruby" does after the shooting is dive into the waiting arms of police, never once taking the slightest aggressive or hostile action. One wonders why the "struggle" didn't end in the garage. Exactly why did it have to drag on into the jail office when "Ruby" wasn't resisting? Show me the image of the shooter being combative after the shooting. There is no such image.
The truth is that the Dallas Police WERE complicit but not with Jack Ruby. He was their mark. They certainly didn't and would never have allowed him to do any shooting. Would you? Who in his right mind would trust Jack Ruby with a loaded gun?
The only rational explanation for what happened is my explanation, that Ruby was the patsy, that he didn't shoot Oswald, that he got lured there, that he went through a scene with them, after which they told him that he shot Oswald, and he believed them. He regarded the Dallas Police as his friends. It doesn't mean he was going to shoot Oswald for them, or even that they would have wanted him to or allowed him to. They didn't need him for that. They just needed him to take the blame for it. That's all. That's the only role he played. He was mentally ill and strung out on drugs, and they knew it. Ruby was subject to blackouts, and they knew that too. So, they would tell Ruby he had a blackout (whether or not they used that word) and that's when he shot Oswald.
Even at his final interview with his lawyer, Elmer Gertz, Elmer asked him, "When did you realize that something had happened?"
The implication of that is that Ruby had no awareness of shooting Oswald. And even in the 1978 tv movie, Ruby and Oswald, they depicted it just that way, where Ruby had to be told that he did it because he didn't know.
But, considering his state of mind, how could Will Fritz go along with this deranged individual firing a gun at Oswald in that crowded cubby hole?
The idea that the Dallas Police let Jack Ruby into the garage to actually shoot Oswald is ridiculous. The idea that they would have entrusted him in any way, shape, or form to fire a loaded gun is preposterous. If the Dallas Police were complicit it could not have been that way. That way is just too dangerous: for other people.
And that would be true even if we had no evidence that the Garage Shooter was James Bookhout. It is just crazy to think that the Dallas Police would have been interested in anything that involved Jack Ruby firing a loaded gun.
You are being called on this, and that's because this is a war, and there are no reprieves. Now, you've got two choices: You can either address it, or you can ignore it and be branded as the paid cyber-hitman and street hitman that you are, which is your fucking occupation. You are a criminal, bpete. And you are bad to the bone.