Monday, June 11, 2018

 "If you will time the time I sent the money order, I think it was 10:17 Sunday morning."  Jack Ruby

The time established in the official record is 11:17. So, that's a one hour difference. 

And it is a huge difference.  Don't think in terms of a 24 hour day. Think of just a morning. And not early in the morning either; rather think in terms of the functional morning. When does it start? Let's say 8 AM. The morning ends at Noon; therefore, the functional or practical morning is 4 hours long. So, to be off by wrong a whole hour in a four hour piece of time is a lot. Was Jack Ruby? I don't think so. 

If Jack Ruby sent the money order at 10:17, then it was 10:21 and not 11:21 that he got to the bottom of the ramp and was jumped by police. That is what I believe happened.

And there is something else I want you to think about: On March 18, 1965, Ruby was appearing before a judge and he asked to speak. The judge consented. And Ruby gave a short account of what happened, and keep in mind that he assumed he did shoot Oswald. It was only because he was told that he did, but that was enough for him; he believed it. But, in the account he gave of his actions that Sunday morning, he said that he read an editorial in the Dallas Times Herald, a Letter to Caroline that nearly broke his heart.

 I went to the Western Union, which was coincidental, and prior to that, I will admit [I'd read] a letter [that] was written to Caroline [Kennedy -- actually an editorial in the November 24, 1963, edition of the Dallas Times Herald] which broke my heart. This letter was written to Caroline telling her how awfully sorry I [sic] was for her. And another situation [in another article], there was something about a trial [Mrs. Kennedy expected to return to Dallas for Oswald's trial]. Don't ask me what took place, and that triggered me off that Sunday morning.

About the second thing, why would Mrs. Kennedy be expected to return to Dallas to testify at Oswald's trial? Mrs. Kennedy certainly could not identify Oswald as the shooter. So again I ask: why would Mrs. Kennedy be expected to return to Dallas to testify at Oswald's trial? 

And regarding the Letter to Caroline, that's the kind of thing that surely would have become part of the national lore, just like the response to Virginia about whether there really is a Santa Claus.

That was from 1897, and you find it everywhere. "Yes, Virginia, there is a Santa Claus."

I did a Google search and found it in an instant, and it's just a puff piece. Right? A Letter to Caroline would have been about something real. But, try to find it with a Google Search. I did and I couldn't.

The Dallas Times Herald was an evening paper, and therefore the only edition that Jack Ruby could have read early Sunday morning was the late Saturday edition. I found it online, and there is no Letter to Caroline. However, there is an article about Jackie Kennedy and the ordeal that she faced. However, it said nothing about her having to return to Dallas to testify at Oswald's trial. The article appears on page A-7.

But perhaps Jack Ruby didn't remember it right. Perhaps it was the Dallas Morning News that he was reading on Sunday morning. So, my next step was to look for the Dallas Morning News for Sunday November 24, 1963, and I found it.

And guess what? There was an article about Jackie maybe having to return to Dallas to testify. It's on page 11, Section One. But, once you start reading it, you find out that the gist of it is that it was highly unlikely that she or LBJ would testify. The article is based on statements by Henry Wade, the Dallas DA, but he never explained how LBJ or Jacqueline Kennedy could be prosecution witnesses. What could they possibly tell the Court about Oswald being the shooter? That they looked up at the window and saw him? That's ridiculous. So, Wade's statements were stupid; incredibly stupid; they were absurd. But, you can find them on page 11, if you're interested.  

Alright, so now we're making progress. Now we have determined the it was definitely the Dallas Morning News that Ruby was talking about. So, was there a Letter to Caroline in that paper? No, there was not.   So, did they modify one of the pages just to ply Jack Ruby?  Was that Letter to Caroline written just for him? 

No comments:

Post a Comment

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.