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

This collage includes new images of Jack Ruby from the Sixth Floor Museum collection. At least, they're new to me. 

On the left side, his hair was painted in quite fully. However, bottom center, his hair is divided like the Red Sea, with bald scalp separating the two swaths of hair. Then on the right, there are two captures from 11/24, however they look nothing alike. Lower right is another sparse showing, but it was enhanced too. The reality was that he had very little hair on top. 

So, why did they always get their artists to enhance Jack Ruby's hair? It's because James Bookhout wore a thick, rug-like toupee at the Garage Spectacle.

Now, that is obviously not Jack Ruby's hair. He never had hair like that. And remember, this was 1963, which was pre-Beatles. Not the young guys, and certainly not the middle-aged men wore their hair that long. Notice that you see no hair growing out of his scalp. That's because it was a wig. 

Here's the closest image we have to Ruby's real hair.

Even this one was enhanced some. He did not have that much hair in front or strands that long. Look how low his rim is, which is the hair that remains even on a bald man. That's the permanent hair. On the vast majority of men, that's the hair that stays put until you die. It is genetically programmed not to fall out. But, his rim is actually very low, even for a bald man.  And any man with a rim that low, is not going to have that much hair in front. What you're seeing there is something that you might see today in a man who has had some hair transplanting done. But, hair transplants did not exist in 1964, which is when that was taken at Jack Ruby's trial. But, that image fell through the cracks. They usually imparted much more hair to Ruby than that, and again, it was all because of Bookhout's wig.