DOVEY'S PROMISE was officially released on April 15 on Fandango and AppleTV. Here is the link on Fandango. It is a very explosive film because of what it says about the JFK assassination.

Everything about the case looked like a professional hit. The attacker began by attacking Mary Pinchot Meyer by hand, even though he was armed with a gun. Then after shooting her, he dragged her body 24 feet, apparently, because he wanted to leave it in a different spot. But, why would Raymond Crump care about that?

And what was his supposed motive? She was in work-out clothes: pedal pushers and sneakers, with no jewelry. So, how much cash could she have had on her?

And rape? She was 2 1/2 inches taller than Crump, and they were about the same weight. So, how was he big enough and strong enough to rape her? It was a popular walking trail, and the site was just 128 feet from busy Canal Rd in Georgetown, with a wide open view.

As Dovey said, the case against Crump never made sense.

But, if Crump didn't do it, and he was acquitted, who did? No one ever suggested it was some other derelict who managed to escape.

The government was skating on thin ice because if Crump didn't do it, it had to be a professional hit. James Angleton, the head of counterintelligence at the CIA, broke into Mary's home the night of her murder to steal her diary.

But, it wasn't the CIA prosecuting Crump. It was the DOJ- the U.S. Department of Justice. The DOJ is the prosecutorial arm of the President of the United States, who was Lyndon Johnson.

So, this case went to the top, and the stakes were extremely high. It was a disaster for the government when Crump got off, and the government went into damage control immediately and thereafter.

This case has been a minefield all along. And now, for the first time, there is a feature film about it that goes right for the jugular.

So, if you haven't done it yet, you should watch DOVEY'S PROMISE because it can change recorded history. It can have an impact like Oliver Stone's JFK. The murders of John F. Kennedy and Mary Pinchot Meyer were unspeakable evils, and this film sheds light on both. Watch it because it is a great courtroom drama, but also watch it because you want justice for them.

This has been suppressed history for 60 years. But, now there is a film about it. So, for the sake of fighting evil and backing good, please watch this film.

https://athome.fandango.com/content/browse/details/Dovey-s-Promise/4111720

 This collage shows images of Oswald and Lovelady and Doorman on 11/22/63. So, we are seeing the men and the clothes they wore that day. The image of Lovelady on the left was found by the renowned JFK researcher Gerda Dunckel. It's from the Malcolm Couch film, and you can see that Lovelady wore a short-sleeved shirt. So, he couldn't possibly be Doorman.

There isn't a speck of doubt that Doorman is Oswald wearing Oswald's clothes.

 These are two images of Billy Lovelady. The one on the left is from 11/22/63. It was taken on the 6th floor, where he had escorted the cops. It was Shelley and Lovelady who escorted the cops up there. They were the only two warehouse employees who were up there at the time. And Shelley was very skinny. So, this on left has to be Lovelady. And it's Lovelady on the right too, photographed in 1976 for the HSCA.

Notice how stocky Lovelady was in 1963. He lost weight afterwards. I figure he was at least 20 pounts lighter on the right. Maybe 25 pounds lighter. I don't know if he lost it spontaneously, or if he was ordered to do it, since Doorman looks so slender. And the reason Doorman looks so slender is because Oswald was very slender. He was 5'9" and just 131 pounds.

But, what I notice, as a former chiropractor, is the same postural habit, where in both images, he is sidebending his head to the right while also rotating it slightly to the left. It was a very deepseated postural habit, and I'm sure he wasn't aware of it. But, that is what felt neutral to him. And we've all got habits like that; not necessarily that exact one, but something.

So, this is definitely Billy Lovelady twice, and you can see that he was way too stocky and burly to be that gaunt, skinny Doorman, who was Oswald.

There are people claiming that Oswald was in the 2nd floor lunch room during the shooting, and Oliver Stone even put it in his movie JFK, but they are all wrong.  

You should read the testimony of Officer Marrion Baker because he was legit. And he said that Oswald was JUST ARRIVING at the 2nd floor lunch room when he first saw him. Oswald was passing through the vestibule of the lunch room when Baker first saw him through the glass. 

So, if Oswald was just getting to the 2nd floor lunch room at 12:31 and 20 seconds,  how could he have been there at 12:30? Are you going to assume that he was there, and then left, and then came back? There are no grounds to assume that. The only rational assumption is that he was just getting there when Baker saw him.  

But, how did Oswald get there, and from where did he come? Did he use the same staircase that Baker was on in the northwest corner of the building? No, that is impossible because if Oswald had come down those stairs, he would have been heard by Baker and Truly. And remember that Truly was ahead of Baker, which means that Truly and Oswald would likely have encountered each other.  

Then, there was Victoria Adams who came down those stairs shortly after the shots, and she would have encountered Oswald too.

But, the most important thing to realize is that the vestibule to the lunch room had 3 doors: an access door from the office side, an access door from the stairwell side, and a door into the lunch room. So, Oswald had to have entered the vestibule through the office access door or the stairwell access door. But, Baker was looking through the glass of the stairwell access door, and the door wasn't moving. It was stationary. So, Oswald could not have used it because it never could have returned to being still and closed that fast. It would have still been in motion. So, since that door was stationary, it means that Oswald must have used the other door: the office access door.

So, if he came from the office side (and he did) it means that he must have come up the one flight of stairs that went from the 1st floor to the 2nd floor in the southeast corner of the building. And that was very close to the doorway. 

So, Oswald went from the doorway, where he was captured in the Altgens photo and the Wiegman film, to the southeast stairs. He climbed them to the 2nd floor. Then he crossed the great expanse of the second floor to get to the northwest corner where the lunch room was. Here is a picture of the stairs that he used.

 Oswald was NOT in the 2nd floor lunch room eating when JFK was being shot. Oswald ate in the 1st floor lunch room, and it was early in the lunch break. Three interrogators wrote that down: Fritz, Hosty, and Bookhout. And Oswald always ate in the 1st floor lunch room, which was also called the Domino room because there were dominos there for men to pass the time when they were on breaks. There was also a newspaper there that Oswald liked to browse through as he ate. And there was also a shelf  there to store your lunch, which Oswald used. There is no reason to think that Oswald ever ate in the 2nd floor lunch room, which was for the office workers, not the warehouse men, which Oswald was.  It was a huge mistake for Oliver Stone to put that in his movie. After eating in the 1st floor lunch room, Oswald went outside to watch the Presidential Parade, and that is exactly what FBI Agent James Hosty wrote down in his notes. 

   

 What about the difference in size between Oswald and Lovelady? The Dallas Police weighed and measured Oswald and found him to be 5'9" 131 pounds. That is thin. I am 5'6" 142 pounds, and people think I look thin. If you look at his earlier photos, you can see that Oswald lost a lot of weight.

Lovelady wasn't weighed and measured by the FBI until February 29, 1964, so over 3 months later, and they said he was 5'8" 170 pounds. But he, for sure, lost weight after the assassination because he was under so much stress. And you can see in his FBI photos that his pants look baggy on him.

But, going by those numbers, Lovelady was an inch shorter and 39 pounds heavier than Oswald. Shouldn't that show in the images? But, can't you see that Doorman and Oswald look to be the exact same size and weight? They look identical. How could this be an image of two men who had a weight difference of almost 40 pounds?

So, no weight or size difference, the exact same set of clothes, plus the clothes are worn the same way, with the shirt unbuttoned and sprawled open, the same gaunt face, the same facial features...how could it not be the same guy? And no Doorman's shirt is not plaid. Look at the upper right side of Doorman's shirt, which is on our left, including his collar. I superimposed an image of Lovelady's posing shirt to show you what plaid looks like. Doorman's shirt is not plaid. The weird contrast it has is due to haze, distortion, and light reflection.

No rational person can deny that Doorman was Oswald because he looks like him; he's dressed like him; and he is sized right to be him. It is insane to deny it.

 I have been saying for years that they altered the Altgens photo. They weren't going to just say that Oswald was Lovelady. They were arrogant, but they weren't that arrogant.

So, they replaced the top of Oswald's head with that of Young Lovelady from 1957. The alterers may not have known that the image of Young Lovelady was that old. But, that's what they used to change the top of Oswald's head.

So, as an experiment, I changed the top of Doorman's head to what it must have looked like before they did that. Now, we can compare that to an image of Oswald. And before you look at it, be aware that Lovelady was shorter than Oswald but 40 pounds heavier. That was probably about the weight difference between Laurel and Hardy. But, this is the same man, of the same weight, wearing the same clothes. And anyone who can't see it is suffering either from a cognitive defect, a moral defect, or both. It is the same guy.

This one line by Joseph Ball in Lovelady's testimony reveals exactly what Ball was up to.

"You got an arrow in the dark and one in the white pointing toward you. Where were you when the picture was taken?"

That tells us that there are two arrows on the photo. As soon as I realized that, I started combing it for the second arrow. And he told him beforehand that "I have a picture here, Commission Exhibit 369." So, he identified it as the photo that Frazier already marked.

So, CE 369 has to have two arrows, and I knew the second one is in the black. But, why did he tell him to draw it in the black when the marker was black? It was to obscure it, since Ball didn't know what Lovelady was going to do.

And then, he asked him the ridiculous question 'Where were you when the picture was taken?" It was just an attempt to change the subject; to move on. Joseph Ball was rattled, and he was trying to recover.

So, I could see the obvious arrow pointing to Oswald, which had to be Frazier's arrow. There was no other arrow like that. The only other mark on the photo is the mark on the arm of the headless man. So, that has to be the tail of Lovelady's arrow. Most of the arrow must have been drawn in the black of the enclosure of his arms.

Take a good look at this image because there is not another one like it in all the world. It is the freakiest image on Earth.

It is the only one with a headless man. It is the only one with the bizarre configuration of Doorman mangled with the freaky man next to him. Who was that man? He was nobody. He was put there to hide the unusual form of Oswald's Russian shirt.

The man in the Fedora hat on the left has his back to the camera. So, instead of looking at the President, he is turned and looking at Oswald. And how can that little boy be so elevated? And don't tell me his mother is holding him because she would have to be Superwoman to do that. And why are the Croft ladies there, when they were down the street below the obelisk? And who is that tiny little woman who is visoring her eyes with one hand? She looks like a Munchkin. And why is the Secret Service agent peering down at the doorway? The caption said that he was looking "at the source of the shots", but if the shots came from the 6th floor, shouldn't he have been looking up at the window, rather than down at that cave? The shots didn't come from the doorway, did they?

Take a good look at this image because it is the freakiest image on Earth. It is also the bloodiest image on Earth. We are looking at the blood of John F. Kennedy who was killed by the national security state, as Vincent Salandria put it. And we are looking at Oswald in the doorway. For 62 years, the U.S. government has been denying it, but that is definitely Oswald, telling us that he didn't shoot JFK.

The testimonies show that CE 369 has two arrows on it. Buell Frazier's came first. Joseph Ball, apparently, pointed to Doorman and asked Fraziier who the guy was. And that direct approach was sensible.

Mr. BALL - Do you recognize this fellow?
Mr. FRAZIER - That is Billy, that is Billy Lovelady.
Mr. BALL - Billy?
Mr. FRAZIER - Right
Mr. BALL - Let's take a marker and make an arrow down that way. That mark is Billy Lovelady?
Mr. FRAZIER - Right.
Mr. BALL - That is where you told us you were standing a moment ago.
Mr. FRAZIER - Right.
Mr. BALL - In front of you to the right over to the wall?
Mr. FRAZIER - Yes.
Mr. BALL - Is this a Commission exhibit?
We will make this a Commission Exhibit No. 369.
(The document referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 369 for identification.)
Mr. BALL - That is written in. The arrow marks Billy Lovelady on Commission's Exhibit No. 369.

But, there was no direct approach with Lovelady. Ball did not point to Doorman and ask him who he was. Why didn't he? The answer is that someone must have warned Ball that Lovelady was balking. So, not wanting to take a chance, he instructed Lovelady to draw an arrow to himself without stating who Doorman was. Note that Lovelady testified in April 1964 and Frazier testified a month before in March 1964. So, Ball gave Lovelady the very same photo on which Frazier had drawn an arrow. 

Mr. BALL - I have got a picture here, Commission Exhibit 369. Are you on that picture?
Mr. LOVELADY - Yes, sir.
Mr. BALL - Take a pen or pencil and mark an arrow where you are.
Mr. LOVELADY - Where I thought the shots are?
Mr. BALL - No; you in the picture.
Mr. LOVELADY - Oh, here (indicating).
Mr. BALL - Draw an arrow down to that; do it in the dark. You got an arrow in the dark and one in the white pointing toward you. Where were you when the picture was taken?
Mr. LOVELADY - Right there at the entrance of the building standing on the the step, would be here (indicating).
Mr. BALL - You were standing on which step?
Mr. LOVELADY - It would be your top level.

So, let's consider that Ball whipped out CE 369, the same photo that Frazier had drawn an arrow on a month before. Why didn't he give Lovelady a fresh photo with no arrow so as not to bias him? It's because he wanted to bias him. And it was after Ball saw where Lovelady drew his arrow that he got crafty. I admit that the IMPLICATION of "You got an arrow in the dark and one in the white pointing toward you" is that the two arrows pointed to the same figure. It's what most people would think. But, that was not the case. And since the marker was black, why would Ball tell Lovelady to draw his arrow in the dark? IT'S BECAUSE WHEN YOU DRAW BLACK ON BLACK, IT DOESN'T SHOW. It was a test, and Lovelady failed it. And I'm sure that afterwards, big men in dark suits and gruff voices paid Lovelady a visit. But fortunately, the "tail" of Lovelady's arrow overlaps the arm of the headless man. So, most of the arrow Lovelady drew was in the black enclosure made by his arms, but a little bit got on the arm, and that's what we can see. And that headless guy is Lovelady. He wasn't really headless, but they had to get rid of his face because they were going to claim that Doorman was him, and they couldn't have two Loveladys. So, Lovelady was standing next to Oswald. This is CE 369 with Frazier's arrow and Lovelady's arrow marked.  

 There was no Prayer Man. He is completely made up. He wasn't Oswald. He wasn't Lovelady. And he wasn't anybody. If you look at the footage, which didn't surface until 30 years later, it is not photographic. It is animation. It is a cartoon. It's also very curde. And everything about it is wrong. It was just 10 seconds after the last shot. So, who are those people? And why are they filing into the TSBD? And where are the peoiple who should be there? And look at how distorted and bizarre they are. Can't you see that it's a freak show?

This Prayer Man ruse was created as a distraction, as a heat sink to draw attention away from Doorman in the Altgens photo, who is Oswald. It was an attempt to create noise, and it's a reflection of the rank evil of the JFK community, which is teeming with Ops.

What we know is that the beginning of the Darnell film captured the doorway, but it was cut out because of what it showed. And I can only guess because it was removed. But then, decades later, after the Darnell film had been circulating without it all that time, the beginning of the film was found as a separate clip, just in time for Oliver Stone's JFK movie.

So, that was 1991, and at the time, nobody claimed that Prayer Man was Oswald. Nobody claimed anything about him. But then, somewhere around 2012, the Prayer Man as Oswald craze started, and it came out of England, which is a hotbed of JFK dis-information. Why? It's because they speak English, and yet, they're far away. There is a similar contingent in Australia, and for the same reason: they speak English but they're far away.

Oswald was the Altgens Doorman, and it is beyond doubt. We can recognize him, his clothing, and his habitual stance, (clasping his hands in front of his body). Don't let yourself be manipulated by JFK-Ops who are working for the other side.

Do you realize that these two men are supposed to be the same man, Billy Lovelady? How dissimilar do two men have to be for you recognize that they are different men?  The man on the right looks like a Neanderthal, or even a gorilla, which is why we call him Gorilla Man. Notice that he has very prominent brow, a short stubby nose, and a long sloping forehead and and a short, forward neck. The man on the left, who looks human, has a longer nose, a less sloping forehead, and a longer and more vertical neck. THEY CAN'T POSSIBLY BE THE SAME MAN BECAUSE THEY DON'T LOOK REMOTELY ALIKE. Yet, they are both claimed to be Billy Lovelady. Why? Because there is no limit to the lies of the desperate killers who killed John F. Kennedy and the people today who protect them and lie for them. Lee Harvey Oswald really was the Man in the Doorway, and the 62 years of lies about it are coming to an end. I know what I'm talking about. Things are happening.  And anyone who tries to tell you that these two are the same man is as corrupt as corruption ever gets. 

 Welcome, and thank you for coming. I am here today to discuss Lee Harvey Oswald's location during the shooting of President Kennedy. He was not up on the 6th floor firing shots. He was standing in the doorway of the Texas Book Depository, and we have two photographs of him there. 

One is from the NBC film taken by Dave Wiegman, although it is very blurry. I don't know if they have a better one, but they might. 

You notice that his shirt was gaped open. That's because it had no buttons, except the bottom two. The other image of Oswald in the doorway is from the iconic photo taken by AP photographer James Altgens. 

So, that is the Doorman on the left and Oswald on the right after his arrest. Can you see that the clothes look exactly the same? And notice that on both, the t-shirt has a vee-shaped opening. It wasn't made that way. Oswald made it that way because he had the habit of stretching his t-shirts. However, the veeishness of his t-shirt fluctuated. If he had it tucked in a lot in front, it pulled the t-shirt down and increased the vee. If he had it tucked in a lot in back, it pulled it up in front and reduced the vee. The collar of his t-shirt always looked stretched, but it didn't always look as vee as this. But, notice how well their faces match too. The eyes, the nose, and the curvature of the face all match very well. Here's another example.

That is the same man wearing the same clothes. And here is one more example.

So there, we see the gaping shirt in three images. But, look at the middle one because you can't make sense of it without recognizing the alternations that were done to it. The man behind Oswald wasn't there. His image was placed there. In today's lingo, you would say that he was pasted in there, and it was to hide the distinctive look of Oswald's sihrt. You notice how close he was to Oswald. He was impossibly close to him. It is impossible to duplicate that image, and people have tried. He is covering up Oswald's left shoulder, which should be visible. Also, the black man beneath Oswald wasn't there. That is, he wasn't in that spot. There was a black man there, whose name was Carl Jones, but he was standing distant to Oswald. Look at the Wiegman image again.

So, that is where Carl was, and he was out of view to Altgens' camera because of the angularity of the shot. It's called parallax effect. The west side of the doorway was cut off to Altgens' camera. So, where did they get that image of Carl to drop in beneath Oswald? They got it from a slide taken by Congressman Phil Willis, who was standing across the street from the entrance. 

They cropped and enlarged the image on the left to make the image on the right. Oswald's shirt was tattered and torn at the bottom, and they had to cover it up, or it would have given away that it was him. 

Then, they changed the top of Oswald's head, giving him the crown of Billy Lovelady, another TSBD employee. But, the source image that they used of Lovelady was one of him from the 1950s. 

Do you see how identical those hairlines are? That's because it is the same hairline. They moved it over. They didn't know that Lovelady was a rapidly balding young man and had lost quite a lot of hair by 1963. Here is a photo of Lovelady from February 1964 that was taken by Mark Lane, and it is the only reliable image of Lovelady that we have.

So, that was Lovelady approximately 3 months after the assassination, and you can see that his hair on top was sparse. Billy Lovelady was not the infamous man in the doorway, but he was in the doorway. In fact, he was standing quite close to Oswald. 

Lovelady's face was blackened out because he was Lovelady. Since they were going to claim that Oswald was Lovelady, they couldn't have two Loveladys. So, they had to get rid of Lovelady's face. 

Now, Oswald said that he was "out with Bill Shelley in front: and Captain Will Fritz wrote it down.

How could Oswald know that Bill Shelley was in front unless he was there himself? He couldn't. The very fact that he named Shelley, who was there and admitted being there, proves that Oswald had to be there.  Shelley didn't admit that Oswald was there, but don't be thrown by that because it was a CIA operation that Shelley was part of. Framing Oswald was the whole idea. 

FBI Agent James Hosty also wrote down that Oswald said he went out in front to watch the Presidential Parade.

So, Oswald said he ate lunch in the 1st floor lunch room and then went outside to watch the P. (Presidential) Parade. And that is exactly what he did.

The fact is that the truth about the JFK assassination is very dark and monstrously so. JFK was killed, according to Attorney Vincent Salandria, by "the national security state" which included Vice President Lyndon Johnson, former CIA Director Allen Dulles  (who was fired by Kennedy), FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover (who was mostly involved in the coverup) and quite a few others in high places. If they thought they could have beaten JFK at the polls in 1964, they would have done that. But, the Republican frontrunner at the time was Nelson Rockefeller, and he was polling way behind JFK, whose popularity was soaring. They wanted to escalate the Vietnam War and send American troops there. They wanted to cease the peaceniking that JFK was doing with the Soviet Union. They wanted to get tough with Castro, meaning to kill him or at least overthrow him. And there were other issues, for instance, JFK having issued U.S Treasury certificates in lieu of Federal Reserve dollars. JFK was a rebel- a rebel with a cause. You might say he was challenging the authority of the Deep State, which no President is allowed to do. President Trump is doing it right now, but he is the first President to do it since JFK.  

The American people will have to reckon with the evil of what happened, which was so much worse, in scope and magnitude, than one lone nut acting alone.  If only it was just that. But, it is incumbent upon all of us to face this decadent part of our past, to make sure that nothing like it ever happens again. 

This is a new collage I have made, and I sent it to Congresswoman Luna. It shows the two images of Oswald in the doorway, and a third image of Oswald after his arrest, and you can see that it's the same man wearing the same clothes: the same grainy, long-sleeved outer shirt that is gaped open over a white t-shirt.          Same man/same clothes. 

 

Congresswoman Luna,  I have published an Open Letter to Kash Patel on my website, after sending it to him by mail.

 https://oswaldinthedoorway.blogspot.com/2025/03/an-open-letter-to-fbi-director-kash.html

I want to emphasize that there is a hierarchy, that some things matter more than other things, and nothing matters more than the fact that photographic evidence proves that Oswald was standing in the doorway of the Book Depository during the shooting of JFK, where we can confirm both Oswald's person and his clothing on the man in the doorway. That "trumps" all the other chatter.

I urge you to show what I've done to forensic photo experts. It just isn't possible that another man looked that much like Oswald and dressed that much like him. 

And if you do, you should make it ones who haven't formed opinions already. Anyone who has an opinion already is likely to stick to it.  So, please show it to forensic photo experts who have not studied the JFK assassination. 

It is going to be pitiful if the lies of the Warren Commission get replaced with other falsehoods, such as that Oswald was one among several Mafia shooters. That is not what happened. Oswald was just a fall guy, a patsy, as he said. 

If there were Mafia shooters on 11/22/63, it hardly matters, because whether there were or weren't, the killing of JFK was a CIA operation. Then, the coverup that followed was done by the FBI and LBJ.  That is the crux of it, and I can't put it more succinctly. 

The bare truth is that Oswald was outside, and it's him in the Altgens photo. It is all going to be for naught unless that is recognized. Thank you.

Ralph Cinque

An Open Letter to FBI Director Kash Patel

 1/24/25

To: FBI Director Kash Patel

From: Ralph Cinque

Director Patel:

I am Ralph Cinque, a JFK assassination researcher, and I have also written to President Trump. I know that he has ordered the release of all JFK assassination documents, causing renewed interest in it.  I believe you will see very quickly, from this letter, that Oswald was innocent. He was standing in the doorway of the Texas Book Depository during the shooting. This collage below shows the same man wearing the same clothes. On the left is a figure from the Altgens photo, which was taken during the shooting, and on the right is Oswald when under arrest. The belief that he was one of multiple shooters is false. He was innocent.  

 

 

Here is another collage, and again it shows the same man wearing the same clothes.

 

 

The only thing that doesn’t match between them is the top of their heads, including their hairlines. However, they placed the ‘crown’ of Billy Lovelady over Oswald’s.

You’ll see on the next page that they had a photo of Lovelady from 1957, and they used it to replace the top of Oswald’s head, including his hairline.  

 

Notice how identical the hair looks between them. However, nobody’s hair looks identical over 6 years time. And, in this case, Lovelady was a rapidly balding young man. The reason those hairlines match so perfectly is because they are the same hairline. They used the one to make the other.

Here is another collage which shows the same man wearing the same clothes.

Now, I realize that two government investigations concluded otherwise, but those investigations were both corrupt. You know that our government has done some terrible things, such as steal the 2020 election from President Trump. Well, they stole the 1964 election from President Kennedy by killing him.    

 

The two circles show that the lay of the collars and the furls beneath them match perfectly. The ears, nose, mouth, chin, and the length of the neck all match too.

But, I have another shocker for you: Jack Ruby was innocent too. He got to the police garage an hour before Oswald’s transfer. There, he was pounced upon by Dallas Police and taken up to the 5^th floor and held there. That’s where he was during the televised spectacle. Masquerading as Ruby at the Spectacle was FBI Agent James W. Bookhout.

On the left below is an image of Jack Ruby 36 hours before Oswald was shot, and on the right is the Garage Shooter. Can you see that they are not the same man? Ruby, on the left, was leaner and taller, and he had a longer neck. Notice on the right the round head of the Shooter, which Ruby didn’t have. Notice the Shooter’s short neck as well, and also his pudginess, which Ruby didn’t have. And I believe Bookhout, on the right, was wearing a toupee’. Notice how matted his hair is.

 

And you’ll see below that Bookhout wore light socks, while Ruby wore black socks, which is apparent in his mug shot.

The image on the left below is from the famous Jackson photo of the Oswald shooting, while the image on the right is from Ruby’s mug shot.

 

 

And notice that their shoes were different too. Bookhout wore dressy wingtips, while Ruby wore high-top work shoes. After this was discovered, the Dallas Police quickly claimed that they replaced everything that Ruby wore, including his underwear. But, that is ridiculous. This was a City Jail. You know very well that defendants are only held at a City Jail until they are arraigned. Then, they are either sent to the County Jail awaiting trial, or they are sent home. And, the Constitution guarantees a speedy arraignment. My father, Mark Cinque, was a NYPD cop, and he was a jailer, and he told me: no way would they have replaced all those clothes on Ruby. They shouldn’t have replaced anything, let alone his underwear. This is from Ruby’s property invoice, showing all the clothes they took from him. Notice that they squeezed in “1 set underwear.” It’s 3^rd up from the bottom.

 

Now, I realize that Ruby accepted that he shot Oswald. But, he was tricked into believing that he did it. Ruby was mentally impaired. In fact, he was deranged, and he was on drugs. He said he had no thought of shooting Oswald and no memory of shooting him; that all he could remember was going down to the basement and being jumped by cops, and not knowing why. When they dragged him up to the 5^th floor and told him that he shot Oswald, he believed them even though he had no memory of doing it, which isn’t normal. No one in his right mind would do that. But, Ruby was not in his right mind.   

Consider that Ruby said that when he was pounced upon that his response was to say, “Hey, what are you doing? You know me. I’m Jack Ruby, not some criminal.”

Why would he say that if he just shot a man?

The story became that he was in an altered mental state, and wasn’t conscious during the act, but no, no, no. What he remembered is exactly what happened, that he was just standing there and was suddenly pounced upon. It was an hour before.

And Ruby even told the Warren Commissioners that he sent the Western Union money wire to Karen Carlin at 10:17, which was an hour before. This is from his testimony.

"There was no one near me when I walked down that ramp, because if you will time the time I sent the money order, I think it was 10:17 Sunday morning." 

He was quickly corrected by a Secret Service agent, but Ruby was right.

And the third victim that day was Officer Roy Vaughn, who guarded the ramp. He was no slouch. Do you know that he went on to become the Chief of Police of Midlothian, Texas, and following that, he became a Municipal Judge? And until his last breath, he said that Ruby never got past him. What happened is that they didn’t place Vaughn there to guard the ramp until after they had Ruby in custody.

This was a very corrupt time. The FBI under J. Edgar Hoover was corrupt, and he was a monster. They ought to remove his name from the building. The CIA under Allen Dulles was corrupt, and he was another monster. You know about his MK-ULTRA mind control program, right? And Lyndon Johnson was another bad man. He was very close with the Dallas Police, and he would hire Detectives Elmer Boyd and Richard Sims to be his bodyguards whenever he came to Dallas. And they were Oswald’s handlers.

I’m sure Johnson got the Dallas Police to do what he wanted the same way he got others to do his bidding: by saying that if they didn’t, WW3 would break out, and 100 million would die.    

There is so much more I can tell you and show you about the JFK assassination. I am the founder of the Oswald Innocence Campaign, whose members include Attorney Mark Lane, Attorney Vincent Salandria, Secret Service Agent Abraham Bolden, Professor David Wrone, Professor Gerald McKnight, author Jim Marrs, and many more.   

With President Trump in the White House and you leading the FBI, there’s a real chance to topple the 62 year old lie that Oswald killed Kennedy. He didn’t. Rogue elements within our government did. I am talking about a rogue CIA, a rogue FBI, and a rogue Vice President Lyndon Johnson.

It wasn’t the Mafia. There may have been some Mafia shooters, but if so, it hardly matters. Attorney Vincent Salandria said it best, that: “the national security state” killed Kennedy. 

The claim that Oswald was one of multiple shooters is an utter lie. He was innocent. Framed and innocent. Thank you. 

 

Sincerely,

Ralph Cinque