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

 Let's look at the Beers photo to see what it tells us about the Oswald shooting.

First. observe that the Shooter was short; shorter than Oswald. Jack Ruby was the same height as Oswald: 5'9". And going by that, I would estimate that the Shooter was about 5'6". James Bookhout was a short man. He told the Warren Commission that when he was looking for his partner James Hosty in the crowded hallway of the Dallas PD, he had to find a pedestal to stand on. He didn't elaborate because he didn't have to; they could see that he was short. He also told the Commissioners that when the motorcade passed him on Main Street that he didn't see JFK because there were people in front of him. A tall man would not have said that. 

But, continuing with the Beers photo, the story of it is that the Shooter rushed in and put the muzzle to Oswald's ribcage and pulled the trigger, but no one saw him. But, how could those men be unaware of him? Leavelle, Oswald, Graves, and not just them but also Tom Petit and Ike Pappas- all of them are oblivious to the Shooter as if he were invisible. You have peripheral vision which extends to 180 degrees. However, it gets pretty blurry out at the edges. Still, peripheral vision is very sensitive to movement. When there is a moving object in your visual field, you sync on it, automatically. It's a survival tactic because that moving object could be an attacker. So, with the Shooter having rushed in to get to Oswald, there is no way those men could not have seen him.  

And remember that, in addition, they were on high alert. All morning, they were saying on the radio that they feared an attack on Oswald, that they received over 100 threatening phone calls, that they were using sniffing dogs and sentries, that it was a maximum security situation. So, I'm saying that those men just pretended not to see the Shooter. 

Notice that Oswald is clasping his hands in front. which was a deeply entrenched habit of his. He did it in the doorway during the motorcade, and it got captured in the Altgens photo, although they tried to hide it. But, in the Jackson photo, which was supposedly taken just a half second later, Oswald has his left arm slammed to his chest. 

But, how could he do that when between the two photos, he was, supposedly, shot in the abdomen, in which his aorta and vena cava were blown out, and he suffered other vascular damage?  His blood was pouring out of his vascular system. That would have been so catastrophic, he would not have been able to do anything. There is no way that after being shot in the manner that he was shot that Oswald would have been capable of slamming his arm to his chest. He would have just collapsed. 

And when you consider the speed that he would have had to move his arm to get it where it is in Jackson, just a half second later, there is no way it could have had a soft landing. He would have had to pound his chest like Tarzan or King Kong. Nobody reported him doing that, and all eyes were on him. It never happened. What we see in the Jackson photo is fake. 

But, why did they fake it? They faked it because that one was supposed to be AFTER the shot, which means that there had to be trauma. But, there was no trauma. So, they had to cover up the area of impact to imply that there is trauma there, but you just can't see it because stuff is in the way. 

But, as for the Shooter, the detection of his presence wasn't just visual. There was also the auditory because his movement and his labored breathing would have created sound. There was also the olfactory because he could have been wearing after-shave or cologne, or just his natural body scent and the smell of his breath were potential elements. There was also the heat of his body. And there was also the fact that a moving object creates air movement that can be felt. So, the idea that the Shooter got that far without being detected by anyone is preposterous.  

But, the worst damage that this photo did to the story was showing the light-colored socks that the Shooter wore. It's a black and white photo, so we don't know what color they were. We only know that they were light. They were probably grey or tan or perhaps beige. But, you can see how much they contrast with Oswald's black socks. Well, Ruby also wore jet black socks, and you can see them in his mug shot. 

Just think: all they had to do was take the mug shot without including his shoes and socks, and they never would have gotten in that jam. But, once it happened, they had to scramble, and what they came up with was to claim that they changed Ruby's underwear, that they gave him a set of underwear. It's ridiculous. It's laughable. It was a City Jail, where after being arraigned, all defendants either go home or go to the County Jail to await trial. So, why would they be giving out underwear? What possible justification could there be for it? And since Ruby's shoes were different from Bookhout's, they also had to claim to take his shoes and replace them as well.  

So, you see, the DPD was like a bowling alley where they had a huge stack of shoes in all sizes, but unlike a bowling alley, they also had a an assortment of underwear, because, as everyone knows, wearing regulation underwear was important. 

Oh what a tangled web we weave when first we venture to deceive. Jack Ruby was innocent! I know that many people find that grating because they've been so fixed in thinking that he did it. But, you just have to get over it. Ruby no more shot Oswald than Oswald shot Kennedy. And both Oswald and Kennedy were killed by the same people. Oswald had to die and die fast because not only could they not let him go to trial, they could not even let him speak to an attorney; not even once.  They would have had to kill the attorney.