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

Stupid Backes is now having a hissy-fit because I said that I find it interesting that we don't actually see Davidson and his sound man Ferguson before or during the shooting.  

They were reportedly just inside the double doors filming the transfer party through the grillwork, but we don't see them then, even though we get plenty of looks inside. Here's a shot from 10 seconds before.

We're looking for a chubby man with a camera and another man with sound equipment sticking very close to him.

Then, they, reportedly, went out into the garage.

So, how about here? Don't you think we should be getting a glimpse of them here? 

We're looking for a chubby man with a camera and another man with sound equipment sticking very close to him.

 So, where are Davidson and Ferguson at this point? Now keep your eye on that really tall guy in back who was guarding the door. He is now going to move forward away from the door.

That's him hovering over the penguin herd. I never realized until now how far he moved away from the door. That's Leavelle's arm on the left in his cream-colored Easter suit. Now, what would have been blocking Davidson from capturing Leavelle and Oswald since the big tall guy was now out of their way?

Then, we get to the Stampede where all these guys come out of the woodwork and start running across the space. Who were they? And what were they doing? Were they trying to get involved in the fray with the shooter? They figured more hands were needed, did they? Or were they reporters trying to get a closer look? Or were they just making a screen on cue? 

It's a long time before we get an open view again, and when we do, it's aftermath shots, with cops holding their arms out keeping people at bay.

So, in this film, we never see Davidson and Ferguson.

But, look at what they were seeing:

Who was this guy in front of them. He's not the big tall guy, because he's not that tall. So, where is the big tall guy? And who was this other guy? Or is he just there to block the view? Because the Davidson film doesn't show us anything. All the things they claim that it has, like 3 images of Ruby, are fake. These guys aren't Jack Ruby. You really have to be out of your fucking mind, and I mean as bad as Backes, to claim that they are Ruby.

How could that be Ruby? For one thing, he doesn't look like Ruby. For another, he is a lot balder than Ruby. Ruby had a lot of thinning and recession, but the that hair he had on top was dark and long. How could that guy possibly be Jack Ruby? And does he look like someone who is in the middle of a melee in which he is the target of the melee? Who takes time out from a melee to gaze calmly at the camera?

This is what I call the "walking along, singing a song" frame. Notice that nobody is laying a hand on him. And if he is walking into the jail house, then what's all the commotion about? It looks like he is cooperating to me. He's not being dragged, is he? Oh, and by the way: he is not remotely Jack Ruby. 

That's not Jack Ruby. That's a pipsqueak wearing a 10 gallon hat. But, how can that image even be claimed for Jim Davidson?

That was within 1 second of the shooting. It does brighten up briefly but look what happens to the guy in back whom we see in silhouette.

Obviously, he looks very different, nothing like he did before, even though only a fraction of a second has passed. Still no sign of the pipsqueak. And then he takes a more obtrusive position again.

How could it possibly get so dark? The garage wasn't that dark. The shot goes off in about 1/10 second, and we never see the pipsqueak in Davidson's film. It is simply a lie that he filmed the pipqueak in the 10 gallon hat. 

I have watched all the films of the Oswald shooting that are available online, and I have never seen Davidson and Ferguson in any of them. Now, if Backes begs to differ, then instead of flapping his dragon lips and spewing bile, he just has to post the images of Davidson and Ferguson. Think about it, Backes: Wouldn't it be more retaliatory to post the images, if you have them?

Well, this turned into an excellent post, entirely provoked by the Idiot Backes. These idiots are like hamsters on the treadmill of my research laboratory, giving me fodder to work with. Everyone needs a purpose in life, and I guess that's theirs. 

And notice that Brian Pete doesn't come out and endorse Joseph Backes' ridiculous, assinine theory that the Dallas Police were working with Ruby to kill Oswald. It really is incredibly stupid. But, Brian doesn't criticize his friend Joseph. He tolerates him- even when he knows he's wrong. Why? It goes back to that wise old political adage attributed to Ronald Reagan:  

"The enemy of my enemy is my friend, especially when the enemy in question is Ralph Cinque."