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

This is not Part III; it is just a point I want to emphasize very strongly from Part II. And that is, that the term "drugs" was never mentioned in a police context, in an investigative context, in a criminal prosecution context in relation to Jack Ruby. Therefore, you can't claim that searching his innards for drugs was what they were doing. I found the medical request form:

So, the Bieb did a rectal examination at the request of the DPD and FBI. Why was the FBI even involved? This wasn't an interstate crime. It wasn't the killing of a President. It was just one man killing another man: a police matter. The FBI issued a statement that no FBI agents were present at the Oswald shooting. (Of course, that was a lie; one of their agents was the shooter.) But afterwards, they were there and involved in ordering the rectal exam?

So, Bieberdorf did a digital rectal exam, up 3 inches, and he said he found no foreign bodies. But, what foreign bodies? They weren't looking for drugs. Ruby wasn't a drug peddler. No one ever said that. So, that leaves guns. 

And, how many people does it take to order a rectal exam? Why does it say that the request came from the DPD and the FBI? How many people talked to Bieberdorf about it? 

And again, why didn't the DPD and FBI order a rectal exam on Oswald? Wasn't his situation the exact same as Ruby's, supposedly? That with a pistol, he shot and killed a man? So, why no rectal exam for him?