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

There is an important aspect of the case which I don't know has  been cited before. That is: that there was nothing normal about the interrogation of Oswald. It was highly abnormal police behavior. 

Take a look at these Fritz Notes because they are weird. First, note that Oswald was arrested in the Texas Theater supposedly for  shooting Tippit. But, you can't find anything about it.                    

The first thing Fritz wrote concerned the rifle. Then, it was that        Oswald went home by bus and changed his britches.  And then it was a discussion of Russia which was initiated by Hosty. BUT, WHAT DOES ANY OF THIS HAVE TO DO WITH TIPPIT?  The rifle wasn't the Tippit murder weapon. And Hosty was already well aware that Oswald went to Russia. Hosty went to Irving to question Oswald's Russian wife,  the one he brought back from Russia, remember?  

So, when did they get around to talking about Tippit? Apparently never.  There isn't one word in any of the Fritz Notes about the Tippit murder. 


Bookhout and Hosty issued a joint report about the first interrogation, but it was written after Oswald died. That's significant because they didn't have to worry about him contradicting them. In the Joint Report, Bookhout wrote that Fritz had been interviewing Oswald before they joined the interrogation. That was a lie; a bold-faced lie. Fritz was the last to get there. He was at the TSBD looking for and examining evidence on the 6th floor. Bookhout said that he and Hosty joined the interrogation at 3:15, but in his own notes, Fritz wrote down that the interrogation started at 3:15. So, Bookhout and Hosty were there for all of it. And Bookhout admitted that he got to the TSBD before Oswald, which means before Fritz. BOOKHOUT WAS WAITING FOR FRITZ. Not vice versa.   

So, why weren't they interested in questioning Oswald about the Tippit murder? I can only guess. Is it because they knew he didn't do it, and any questioning they did only had the potential to bring out information that would exonerate him? The less said the better. 

Then, according to Bookhout, it went into Mexico, Russia, Fair Play for Cuba, medals for marksmanship, etc. but none of it had anything to do with the Tippit murder.  

Finally, at the end of the Report, Bookhout wrote that Oswald "frantically" denied shooting Tippit or Kennedy. But, that doesn't make sense. Most defendants deny guilt, and the question is what particulars do they provide, such as their alibi. It is so empty to just say that he denied guilt and leave it at that. Maybe that's why Bookhout threw in the word "frantically." 

But, according to Bookhout, they denied Oswald's Constitutional rights because the Constitution says that you have the right to be informed of the charges against you. Think about it: if the police dragged you in, wouldn't you demand to know what they are holding you for? Would you sit there and discuss whether you took a trip to Mexico or whether you lived in Russia or whether you were involved with the Fair Play for Cuba Committee before finding out what they arrested you for? 

And, who are you going to believe, Bookhout or Oswald? At the Midnight Press Conference, a reporter told Oswald that he was accused of shooting the President, and Oswald said, "No one has said that to me yet."  Well, if no one said it to him yet, then no one said it to him at the first interrogation- or the second or third. 

So, I think Bookhout just put that in the Joint Report to make it look, like they discussed it, rather than devoting all the time to Russia, Mexico, etc. But, he put it at the end. It was the last thing he wrote. It was the first thing he should have asked, but if the report is a chronological account, then it was the last thing that came up. 

Oswald also said at the Midnight Press Conference that he knew he was accused of shooting a police officer, but he knew nothing more than that. But, he was formally arraigned for the murder of Tippit at 7:10 that evening. So, he had to know about that. But, we simply have no record of Oswald being questioned about the Tippit murder- ever. 

We don't know Oswald's alibi for the Tippit murder, where he said he was at 1:15. We have Butch Burroughs saying that Oswald was definitely in the theater well before that, but that only came out from Jim Douglass during his research for his book, JFK and the Unspeakable. Obviously, it is a very important piece of testimony. 

We don't know what Oswald said about how he got to the theater. He must have been driven there because it was a mile, and that's if he took the shortest route. If you add a detour to 10th and Patton it was much more than a mile. And obviously, if Oswald had gone to 10th and Patton, then he must have  had some other destination in mind than the theater. And it has never been claimed that Oswald planned to go to the Texas Theater, rather that, he "ducked" in there to get off the street. When asked where Oswald was heading before the Tippit shooting, Warren Commission Attorney David Belin said, "Mexico." But, how stupid is that? I mean: there is not the slightest piece of evidence for it. He just fucking made it up.  

But, the point is that we know NOTHING about what Oswald said in his denial of having shot Tippit. But, whatever he said, it must have been so powerful that they didn't dare tell us anything. 

But wait: they knew what he did. You don't think they let Oswald leave Dealey Plaza without following him do you? You don't think they were going to let the Patsy of the Century wander off by himself, do you? So, they didn't need to ask him.    

So, what really happened at that first interrogation? Let's try to analyze it. 

First, did Oswald even know that Tippit had been shot? How? I assume he didn't know.  He was in the theater at the time. Did he know he was suspected of killing Kennedy?  I presume he figured that his arrest had something to do with it, but the fact is: we don't know anything about what Oswald knew. 

But, this was a police interrogation, and even though they asked him about owning a rifle, none of the Klein Hardware malarchy was uncovered yet. That wasn't until early Saturday morning. But, first things first. What would you really expect them to ask him? I figure first his name and address. They picked him up in the Texas Theater, so, they should have asked him what he was doing there. Why did he go in there? Was it to watch a war movie? And why did he sneak in? Because that was the story, and it was the whole basis for why they went to the theater; because a man supposedly snuck in without paying. So, they should have asked him about that.  Then, how did he get there? And where was he before that? And after he answered, they could have said, "Do you deny being at 10th and Patton at 1:15?" Of course, he would have denied it. "Do you deny having an encounter with a police officer at 10th and Patton?" Of course, he would have denied it. And then, "Do you deny shooting a police officer at 10th and Patton?"  


But, none of that happened. So, why was the interrogation of Oswald so weird and so counter-intuitive?  I think it's because of coaching Fritz got from Johnson's people and from the FBI. What all did you say to Fritz, Bill Moyers?