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

I have been invited to speak on the innocence of Jack Ruby at an upcoming conference, and this is going to be the introduction to it.

Thank you very much. I am here to speak to you today on the innocence of Jack Ruby, and I realize that, for many people, it is a hard sell- even if they believe in the innocence of Oswald It triggers certain reactions, mocking reactions, from people, and i know this from experience. For example:

"How can you deny that Ruby did it when millions of people saw him do it on television?"

But no. Millions of people saw a short, portly, middle-aged white man shoot Oswald. You can't claim that the visible features of that man distinguish him as Jack Ruby. His face is, conveniently, is never seen in the Garage. And when you consider the few visible features of his that are accessible, they conflict with Jack Ruby, as I will demonstrate.

"How can you claim that Ruby didn't do it when he admitted that he did?"

That's not true either. Ruby ACCEPTED that he did. Big difference. He said he went to the garage without the slightest compunction to shoot Oswald; without the slightest encouragement or pressure from anyone to shoot Oswald and without any awareness of having shot Oswald.  HE HAD NO MEMORY OF DOING IT. All he remembered was going to the garage, being pounced upon by Dallas Police, then dragged up to the 5th floor, where he was told by Dallas Police that he shot Oswald. Their telling him was the entire basis of his acceptance, and I'm saying that they, the Dallas Police, lied.

'How can you deny Ruby's guilt when he knew things, such as that LBJ was behind the JFK assassination?"

Ruby got that from a book that he read, A Texan Looks At Lyndon, by J. Evetts Haley. Ruby did not know LBJ, and he knewnothing about the JFK assassination or about the Oswald assassination. He didn't conspire with anyone; he was conspired against. And if he had known anything; if he had any dirt on anybody, they would have had to kill him immediately, and they would have. The fact that he lived for three years tells you that he didn't know anything. He held no secrets.

Now, there are multiple streams of evidence that prove that Ruby was innocent. I am going to be spending most of my time today on just one: the photographic evidence. Because: that's number one for me. Photographic evidence is physical evidence; hard physical evidence. It does not change; it can't be contradicted; and it does not depend on anyone's lip-flapping. But, they're are other compelling streams of evidence that I will briefly touch on.

There is the timeline, the fact that Ruby said h got up early on Sunday morning, and all he did before leaving was get dressed and eat breakfast. Western Union was only 3 miles away from his apartment, and it was a Sunday morning. In 1963 traffic, it probably took only 5 minutes. Even today, it only takes 7. Considering all that, he would have gotten to Western Union before 11:15. 

And he said he got to Western Union before 11:15. During his testimony to the Warren Commissioners, he said he sent the telegram at 10:15. He was quickly corrected by a SS agent who wasn't even there or in the state of Texas on 11/24/63. And it's true that Ruby did not dispute the correction, but Ruby didn't dispute anything from Authority. He was very submissive to authority. 

Ruby's account of what happened at the Main Street Ramp was different from what Officer Roy Vaughan said and what Lt. Sam Rio Pierce said. They said that Pierce had two other officers in the car. Ruby reported only seeing Pierce. Ruby said he did not recognize the Officer on foot, but he knew Roy Vaughn. Vaughn forgave a traffic violation for Ruby once  for being a "friend of the Department." And he had been to the Carousel Club to investigate a complaint. And Ruby would have recognized him.  And Vaughn denied speaking to Pierce, while Ruby said that the Officer was leaning in, at the car window, talking to Pierce. 

And if you listen to Vaughn's account, you learn that he was held on the 3rd floor drinking coffee for a long time before they came and got him. What happened is that Ruby got there early . He had his melee in the garage and was hustled up to the 5th floor. That's where he was during the Garage Spectacle, and that's where he was when Roy Vaughn began his shift at the ramp. Roy Vaughn was the 3rd victim that day. Oswald was first; Ruby was second; and Vaughn was third. And Roy went to his grave denying that Ruby ever showed up during his shift at the ramp. We need to believe Roy Vaughn. He was a strapping 29 year old policeman and perfectly capable of guarding an 8 foot wide ramp. 

And there are other streams of evidence that support Ruby's innocence which I can't go into because I have to get to these photos. But, I am as certain of Ruby's innocence as I am of Oswald's innocence, and I would bet my life on that since he was standing in the doorway at the time of the shooting, and we have a photograph of him there, in which we can recognize both him and his very distinctive clothing. So yes, I would bet my life that Jack Ruby was innocent: completely and totally innocent. 

OK, now on to the photos.