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

 Even Vincent Bugliosi admitted that Ruby was stripped down to his underwear. 

Now all that talking attributed to Ruby above is horse shit. He didn't say any of those things. They made it up. Ruby was out of it; he was in a daze from all the drugs they got him to take. Bugliosi implies that they stripped him down to his shorts so that they could "completely" search his clothes for weapons, but that is more horse shit. Cops search offenders for weapons all the time, but they don't strip them down to the their underwear to do it. It isn't necessary.  A gun can be felt through fabric. And if anyone should have known that, it was Bugliosi, a lifelong prosecutor. And it is an example of how the JFK assassination, the very study of it from the official perspective, where you are trying very hard to rationalize it,  it warps the mind.  There is mental desperation involved where you mine for explanations and excuses- anything to prop the thing up.  There is NO excuse for undressing Ruby. They didn't do any elaborate searches on Oswald. Couldn't he have had another gun? I'm sure they must have patted him down, but they didn't unclothe him. However, they did take away his outer shirt, supposedly because it was considered "evidence " So, why didn't they get him another  shirt? It was late November in Dallas. He had to walk around that drafty building in just a tee shirt, while cops and reporters were wearing thick warm suits, jackets, and hats. 

But returning to Ruby, they took his clothes because Bookhout needed to wear them during the televised spectacle. Ruby was 5'9"  while Bookhout was only 5'6". So, Ruby's jacket should have been long on Bookhout, and it was.

Compare the length of "Ruby's" jacket to Leavelle's. "Ruby's" is longer. It's halfway to being like a top coat. But otherwise, it looks tight across his back, like he is about to rip it, and that's because Bookhout was thicker that way than Ruby. And one of the reporters, the French guy, even said that the Shooter looked "strong and muscular." I don't know about that; I think the right word is "stocky." 

This claim is very solid, and the very fact that they stripped Ruby to his underwear tells you that they needed his clothes. There is no other valid reason why they would have done that. Again: police pat down offenders all the time searching for weapons, and they never strip them to their underwear to do it. Only in JFK-land.