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

I found some more images of Ruby's hair, and it is my contention that his hair was doctored and enhanced in every photo. It started because the hair of the Garage Shooter seemed so thick- like a rug- in the Jackson photo, that they felt that they couldn't show him as bald as he was. But, since it was done each time individually, it ran the gamut in terms of coverage. 

But first, let's look at an image of him from 1960 taken at a parade in Dallas. He must have had more hair then than in 1963 or thereafter. Baldness is progressive. It only goes in one direction: from more to less to none.

 This picture is also bogus. If he had a thick tuft of hair right in front, why would he keep it so short? Why wouldn't he let it grow and comb it back and get more coverage? But be aware that it would be VERY unusual for a man to have lost so much hair on top as we see there but retain a thick tuft in front. It does not fit the pattern of male pattern baldness. So, I think that was enhanced too. 
There's a lot of paint in this one:

And even more here. They really filled it in. Again, compare it to the one in 1960. 

Look at the range in hair coverage from left to right in this collage.

What a sweep they gave him here. 

They liked to give him a subtle part, which is also weird. 

But, sometimes they parted it the other way.

Look at this coverage:

But, then look what happened. 

It's a shame. The curse of growing older. 

Back and forth it goes.

This one looks particularly fake.

This is his jail transfer photo.

Now some really good coverage.

This is supposed to be Ruby during the melee'. You'd have to be an idiot to believe that it's him. I mean, not only is the hair wrong, but it's not even his face.