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

James Norwood is now dragging his feet about providing his statement about Oswald in the doorway, even after I agreed to put it up. Why so?

I hope it's because he realizes that if he is going to cast doubt on Oswald in the doorway, he's got to propose an alternative. He can't just leave it hanging. He can't just say that Oswald was somewhere in the building or wandering around the building. That won't cut it. That's just bull. It's just evasion. 

I've explained that there are no rational grounds to extend Oswald's time in the 1st floor lunch room to 12:30. It doesn't take that long to eat a cheese sandwich and apple. And, like everyone else, Oswald knew what was about to happen, and I don't mean the murder; I mean the motorcade. The very idea that he would dawdle in the lunch room with his cheese sandwich and apple until 12:30 and miss the motorcade is preposterous. 

What did Lance Moore just tell us?

"I am absolutely convinced that Oswald’s personality was such that he would not have missed a chance to view JFK rolling past him within a few feet of his building."

Why wouldn't he? Who has the right to assume that Oswald, of all people, would deliberately miss and avoid such a momentous and historic event?  

So, the 1st floor lunch room alternative doesn't work; it doesn't make sense.  And neither does the 2nd floor lunch room since Oswald was just getting there when Baker saw him. Oswald hadn't even stepped foot in it yet at 12:31 and a half, so how could he have been there at 12:30?

So, much as you might want to, you can't say that Oswald was in the 1st floor lunch room or the 2nd floor lunch room at 12:30 sharp. The evidence conflicts with both of those. 

So, what's left? That Oswald was at a window? He wasn't at a window. If he was at a window (and I mean other than the 6th floor, of course) he would have said so, and people would have seen him there. Other people were seen at windows, so why wouldn't he have been seen? There is no reason to speculate like that. 

To a great extent, this is very much a default situation. Besides the evidence of having two pictures of him standing in the doorway...

which you'd think would clinch it for most people, there is the fact that there is no other location for him at 12:30 except the doorway. That is to say that there is no other location that is anything but an arbitrary, fanciful, capricious idea. It's just arguing for the sake of arguing. It's just posing a "what if" because the mind can conceive it. I could also say it's just a rhetorical argument or a debate tactic.   

Look: the President of the United States was driving by. On what grounds does anyone have the right to assume that Lee Harvey Oswald wasn't interested? That he would rather hide in a closet than watch it? That's the disgusting mindset, that of course, weird, eccentric, anti-social Oswald would rather do anything but stand among people and watch the President. Why? Because he's weird, and his friends and foes alike are supposed to see him that way. 

I'm not saying that Oswald could have been in the doorway. I'm saying that he was, and there is no one other idea for his whereabouts that has the slightest credibility and plausibility.