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

 Did you know that Dallas Police changed Jack Ruby's underwear? At least, they claimed to. It's listed in his property invoice that they took from him one set underwear. At first, they thought they put it in Bin N-30, but it was actually Bin N-15. They had so many property bins at the DPD, they had to identify them by letters and numbers. If they had 30 N bins, they must have had 30 for the 13 letters before N, right? So, that's 420 bins, and it's only halfway through the alphabet.  

Why would they need to take his soiled underwear? And if you are wondering if they had fresh underwear to give him, the answer is yes. At least, that's the story. Do you know why this came up? It was because it was noticed that the Garage Shooter in the Jackson photo wore light socks, but Ruby wore black socks in his mug shot.

Do you remember that I pointed out that the Garage Shooter had long curly hair in back and a clean neckline, whereas Ruby, in his mug shot, had a scruffy neckline?  You can't make them into the same man, any more than you can pound a square peg into a round hole. 

But, let's return to the underwear. This was a City Jail. You have a Constitutional right called habeus corpus, which includes the right to see a judge very quickly following your arrest. It's called an arraignment, and in every state, arrested persons get to see a judge quickly, usually within 24 hours of their arrest. At the arraignment, the judge will assess the situation to determine if it was a valid arrest and if the defendant should stand trial. If so, he or she is either released on bail or bond, or rarely, on their own recognizance, or they are remanded to the County Jail. But, what they are not going to do is remain at the City Jail. And that was true in Jack Ruby's case too. He was arraigned the same day, and he was transferred to the County Jail the next day at Noon. 

So, this idea that they changed his underwear- or that they even had underwear to give him- is preposterous. It was preposterous that they changed his clothes at all because it does not happen at a City Jail. They didn't change Oswald's clothes. The clothes he wore on Sunday morning were his own clothes, retrieved from his room. 

So, why did they make this ridiculous claim about changing his underwear? It's because they had to. It was either do that or admit that the Garage Shooter and Jack Ruby were two different men. 

So, why didn't people erupt over this, and yell, "No fucking way!" It's because they respected authority. They respected the police. They believed what they were told- by the good guys. 

And why don't people yell about it today? There are people right now who, upon reading this, are going to brush it off. What is John McAdams gong to say? What is David Von Pein going to say? They're not going to admit that this underwear story completely exonerates Ruby. It's also true of their detractors, who cling to the delusion that Ruby was a Mafioso, a gun-runner, a hit man, a pimp, that he was put up to killing Oswald, and was even involved in killing Kennedy. They're going to keep on spewing their stuff and won't be deterred. 

But, what about you? Have you enough reason now, and have you the courage and the unfettered mind to now admit that Jack Ruby was innocent?  That it wasn't him in the Garage, that they already had him in custody up on the 5th floor, and they slipped him into the story later? That is exactly what happened.