Who Is Responsible For Jack Ruby's Assassination

One of the most tragic days in United States history was November 22, 1963. This day, as many know, was the day that President John F. Kennedy was shot and killed. It took federal officials less than two hours to locate and arrest their prime suspect, Lee Harvey Oswald. Two days later, Jack Ruby, apparently fueled by a desire for revenge, infiltrated the Dallas Police Department and assassinated Oswald while he was en route to the jail.
Between these events and the subsequent investigation, questions began to arise. Did Oswald, in fact, fire the fatal head shot? What were Jack Ruby’s real motives for his actions? Did Oswald act alone, or was he a member of a much larger conspiracy? If he was, who else was involved? Among others,

these are just a few questions that have sparked some of the most elaborate and even outlandish conspiracy theories to date. Each of these theories has its merits and downfalls. There is evidence to both support and refute these theories. This paper will accomplish two things. First, it will establish the assassination of Kennedy as a crime. Second, it will analyze the investigation and a few of the current conspiracy theories, and weigh these findings against the evidence that has been collected in relation to these events.
What is a crime? In the United States, crime is defined as an “act or omission forbidden by law and punishable by a fine, imprisonment, or even death; crimes and their penalties are established and defined by state and federal statutes and local ordinances.” In other words, a crime is anything that is specifically prohibited by the laws of our land, as dictated through acts of city, state, or federal legislature. Additionally, for a person to be convicted of a crime in America, the prosecution must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that a suspect committed the crime. This is done through the collection, preservation, examination, and presentation of evidence associated with the crime in court.
Each crime, and even each individual case, yields varying amounts and types of evidence. It literally depends on the circumstances surrounding the crime committed. In the case of Kennedy’s assassination, the physical evidence that was collected included bullet casings, the murder weapon, fingerprints, video footage, and eyewitness statements, among other things. To prove that Kennedy’s and Oswald’s assassinations were crimes, we merely need to look at the evidence and the context of the crime.
An assassination is considered first-degree murder, which can be a capital offense. In the case of assassinating a president of the United States, it is most definitely a capital offense. To prove a first-degree murder, the circumstances of the event must exhibit three factors: the killing of another human, the actus reus; malice aforethought, the mens rea; and it must be pre-meditated and intentional. As most popular television shows explain it, the suspect must have had means, the ability to commit the crime; motive, a reason for committing the crime; and opportunity, the set of circumstances that make it possible for the suspect to commit the crime.
Of the three elements, proving the actus reus is arguably the most difficult. It is this portion in which physical evidence becomes a key factor. Just the fact that the president was assassinated proves that the crime was pre-meditated, intentional, and with malicious intent. The hardest part was to prove that an individual, in this case Lee Harvey Oswald, committed the crime. To do this, the questions “who,” “what,” “when,” “where,” “why,” and “how” must be answered.
Let us begin with “what,” “when,” and “where,” as they are the easiest to answer. Simply put, John F. Kennedy was assassinated on November 22, 1963 at 12:30 P.M. local time in the middle of Dallas, Texas’ Dealey Plaza. One sentence defines half of the questions necessary to prove the actus reus. Next we will focus on “how” and “who”.
Of the two, “how” is the easier to define, though both are more difficult than the preceding three questions. There are several theories as to how exactly the president was shot. Almost all of the witnesses to the assassination claim there were three shots fired from the Texas School Book Depository. Additionally, some witnesses claimed to have heard a shot come “from behind and to [their] right.”
This would have placed a second shooter in front and a little to the side of Kennedy. This is the how the “grassy knoll” theory originated. We will discuss this theory a little later and present the evidence surrounding it. Regardless of whether there was a second shooter on the grassy knoll or not, the evidence collected at the Depository showed that three shots were, in fact, fired from that location. This, at the very least, defines how the crime was committed.
Who committed the potential crime is probably the most important aspect to define. It is this question, combined with why, that determines who the suspects in any given crime are. Once this list has been generated, the other question come into play in determining whether the evidence supports or refutes the suspect’s role in the crime. In this case, Lee Harvey Oswald became the prime suspect. The evidence supporting this was primarily eyewitness accounts; however, Oswald sealed his fate when he was confronted near his residence by J.D. Tippit.
Tippit was a police officer who had heard of the tragedy and a description of the suspect over his radio.

Having spotted Oswald, who generally matched the description provided, walking down the street, Tippit pulled over and engaged Oswald in conversation. At one point, Tippit exited his vehicle, at which point Oswald promptly shot him four times with a .38 revolver, including once in the head. The witnesses in this violent murder sealed his fate. Oswald was arrested one hour and 20 minutes after he fired the fatal shot at Kennedy. Police, however, were not aware they had captured the assassin. They thought they were arresting the murderer of J.D. Tippit.
Finally, we must answer the question of “why.” This is most synonymous with the motive of the act. In addition, this question is where the conspiracy theories come into play. Did Lee Harvey Oswald act alone, or was he a member of a much larger scheme? Was there a second shooter on the grassy knoll? These questions pertain to the motive behind the assassination and give rise to the major conspiracy theories present

today.
The most common conspiracy theory is the “grassy knoll” theory. This theory states that Oswald did not act alone and that there was a second shooter located on the grassy knoll in front of and slightly to the side of the president. This theory was originally presented by House Select Committee on Assassinations in 1976. As part of their investigation, they concluded that the fatal shot stuck President Kennedy in the right front of his head. If this were true, the exit wound would be in the back of his head. According to Jesse Ventura in They Killed Our President, this seems to coincide with blood spatter analysis in which police officers located to rear left of the motorcade were covered in blood and brain matter. Unfortunately, Mr. Ventura’s claims do not quite hold up against forensic evidence.
For the 50th anniversary of Kennedy’s assassination, a popular science documentary show called Nova filmed an episode investigating this exact conspiracy theory. They brought in independent investigators who had been investigating the assassination extensively. In this episode, they concluded two things. The first was the “single bullet” theory, that a single bullet caused seven separate wounds in the president and Governor John Connally, was the accurate explanation. The second was an explanation for the seemingly contradictory events that transpired.
Lee Harvey Oswald used an Italian 6.5mm Mannlicher-Carcano bolt-action rifle. The type of round for this gun is highly unique. Rather than have a tapered point, like most modern rounds, the Carcano bullet is a straight cylinder with a rounded tip. Additionally, it is a full metal jacket round. These two details mean that the bullet is very stable as it travels through the air, and that the round is highly resistant to damage. Upon extensive testing of the exact model weapon Oswald used, Nova reports that this specific type of round could sufficiently pass through the body mass of two people with very little damage sustained to the bullet.
After proving that the weapon used sufficiently upheld the claims of the Warren Commission, the scientists then turned to the contradictory events. According to the Zapruder film, the only video evidence depicting the entire assassination as a continuous sequence of events, Kennedy moves back and to the left when he is shot in the head. This seemingly supports the “grassy knoll” theory as it would have been at the appropriate angle to cause such a reflex from the force of the bullet alone. Unfortunately, however, the forensic evidence does not support this claim.
The same scientists who proved the “single bullet” theory were able to obtain access to the autopsy x-rays of Kennedy’s head, clothing, and other evidence involved in the assassination. Upon examining all of this evidence, they were able to determine conclusively that Kennedy had been shot twice: once in the back which exited through his neck, the bullet in question for the “single bullet” theory; and once in the back of his head. The bullet to the back of the head is the controversial shot.
The x-rays of Kennedy’s head showed that the right side of his head suffered extensive damage, as one would expect when a head literally explodes. It does not show, however, any damage to the majority of the left side of his brain. If there were a second shooter on the grassy knoll, the trajectory of the bullet that would have struck Kennedy would have exited out of the rear left of his head, causing extensive damage to the left side of his brain. The evidence directly refutes this, thereby disproving the “grassy knoll” theory.
Further evidence of this is shown in the photographs of the entry wound of the head shot, which is shown to clearly be the rear of his head; as well as the fracture patterns of the president’s skull.

By forensically reconstructing the fracture patterns of his skull, current investigators were able to determine that they radiated out from a single point and that the pressure of the brain matter against the front of the skull caused the fractures perpendicular to the radii. In fact, everything from a forensic standpoint supports the “lone gunman” theory; that Oswald acted alone during the assassination.
But all of this information does not answer the question of why Lee Harvey Oswald assassinated President Kennedy. We have determined that he acted alone in committing the deed, but did he act as a part of a larger conspiracy? Suspicious circumstances such as Jack Ruby’s actions two days after the assassination certainly seem to suggest a cover-up. If this were true, however, who is leading the cover-up? Was it the federal government? If so, was the investigation just for show? What about the Mafia, Cubans, Russians, or other interested parties? Did they play a

role?
Unfortunately, unless one party steps forward to claim responsibility, the American public will likely never know. Forensic science can prove what happened, but not why a crime occurred. Determining that requires cooperative parties and a different approach; neither of which will likely ever occur in regards to the assassination of John F. Kennedy.
After the House Select Committee on Assassinations published their findings indicating they believed there was a conspiracy, national polls indicated that 81 percent of Americans believed that others were involved in the assassination plot, to some extent. 50 years after the assassination, polls indicate only 61 percent of Americans currently believe some kind of conspiracy occurred. Everyone is entitled to their own opinion. Unfortunately, no amount of forensic investigation will be able to clear up this particular mystery. There simply is no way to prove who else, if anybody was involved in John F. Kennedy’s assassination. It is a terrible tragedy that will likely never reach full closure.