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

Very interesting communication here between the Wizard and Amy.

To Amy:

Thanks. I just realized that I mis-read my own photo caption. Miller, in fact, does not have an arrow pointing to him in the "people who knew Ruby" photos. I put the "Mcmillon" caption in very small print. Having said that, I would not be surprised to find out that Miller did actually know Ruby.

Miller is the cop who put the covering on the shooter's head.

In my comment about complicit cops, I meant that, given that it was Bookhout, rather than Ruby, in that swarm, anyone who said that he had seen Ruby do the shooting must, by definition, be lying, as opposed to any witness who merely said that he had assumed that it was Ruby after seeing Ruby paraded in the corridor afterwards or after seeing the hat. 

I used a different screen to view the Beers photo that you attached to your email. I had previously thought that the shooter was long gone through that door by the moment of that photo, but I think that the top of a bald head is just visible between two of the cops pushing at the front, just like the photo we examined a few weeks ago with Mcmillon, Miller and Graves surrounding the shooter. It does raise the obvious question about the nature of the covering. I have sometimes wondered whether Bookhout's wig came off along with the hat and whether Miller and Harrison were readjusting the wig. On the other hand, Miller did seem to have something ready in his hands as he pounced.

I hardly need to say that the wig misfortune would add another layer of insanity to the proceedings.

Oswald, Leavelle and Combest have obviously vanished by this point. I have always assumed that they went through the same door as the shooter, but they could have gone through the double doors. There is a corridor junction just beyond the office. In the Jim Davidson film Leavelle seems to be heading across the corridor, but he is caught in only a few frames.

I have become slightly more suspicious of Jim Davidson after seeing him on friendly terms with Pelou at the Ruby trial. In the Beers photo attached, he is not being jostled at all, and yet in the film his camera seems to wobble badly. Again, the shooter is in front of him, but all you get is wobble and blur in the film. This is clearly why documentary edits cut to the door being slammed in the cameraman's face, with Cutchshaw looking back through the glass.

Wizard 

Ralph Cinque: Let's look again at the Wizard's gif of Miller covering up Bookhout's head.

Two points: 1) Maksim Irkutsk, the Russian researcher who was the very first to realize that that shooter was not Jack Ruby, doubts the veracity of the naked head of "Ruby" that we see here. 2) Although I do think that Bookhout wore a toupee' (his hair was certainly not that long in back) I don't think it's a toupee that Miller is putting over him. If Bookhout's toupee came off, then someone must have snatched it up and put in his pocket to vanish it. 

And I couldn't agree more that all that wobbling and chaos and pandemonium and noise in the Davidson film (which is all it is, capturing no crucial post-shot action at all, where it missed everything) is an impossible outcome. As you watch it, you realize that there are times that the camera was pointed at the wall or pointed at the floor or pointed at someone's back: anything but show what happened. Just convey the idea of wild pandemonium and chaos, frantic-ness and panic, but then, once inside, order and calm were immediately restored. 

So, it goes from this: "It was wild, I tell you, wild." 

To this: "Everything is under control." 

What a difference a few seconds made.  It instantly became becalmed.