As the curator of the Sixth Floor Museum Gary Mack holds a role in overseeing exhibits offered for the public's review. Yet Mack's feasible desire to use a photograph to assert improbable associations render his opinions untenable. Mack attributes in my view more importance to this photograph than reasonable and some who advocate conspiracy have their favorite self-determined important picture as well. Yet each hypothesis is often championed by unverifiable claims lacking the required proof.
"But there’s another photograph that remains relevant and gripping five decades later, in a different way, and relatively few have seen it."i (Gary Mack)
All the evidence is important, yet we must be critical in our value of any single item, a photograph of Lee Harvey Oswald firing a weapon could support the article's ideas. Yet officials do not possess one, nor do they possess a single witness who conclusively identified Lee Harvey Oswald in the sniper's nest.ii Despite speculation of the photograph's importance, it remains one of many used to support a hypothesis. Among the others is the Altgens 6, favored by those who view Oswald among the blurred figures despite the contending evidence and some purport the Moorman photograph contains a hidden assassin too. Yet all the photographs mentioned share a common trait, each cannot alone prove or dispute Oswald's guilt and none of these photographs is currently vital.
"MacCammon, who died in 2005, captured a moment that says so much about the soon-to-be- accused assassin...Do innocent people take guns to movies, assault a police officer and try to shoot him?" (Gary Mack)
Mack again speculates deep inferences without offering sufficient additional proof. The photo offers Oswald's belligerence and his feasible attempts to resist arrest, yet many innocent people also have done so, it is not a sign of guilt unless one speculates. It proves he was a disruptive and resisted but fails to substantiate Oswald alone murdered President Kennedy.
Additional compounding theories offer Mack long ago decided his version of events and the questions presented are seemingly rhetorical to those who disagree. Do innocent people take guns to theaters? If they have the proper license, some do. However, I would not call Oswald innocent; I would say he was guilty of repeated legal offenses and possibly the murder of J.D. Tippit. Yet add Mack's photograph to the evidence, and it consistently fails to prove the article's claim. Innocence and guilt cannot reasonably depend on a subjective judgment of a single picture. Oswald dies before receiving any due process or legal representation. Seeking to prove his preconceptions Mack overlooks the repeated legal inconsistencies and Mack's photograph consistently fails to prove the article's claim because innocence and guilt cannot reasonably depend on a subjective judgment of a single picture. Oswald dies before receiving any legal process and seeking to prove his preconceptions Mack overlooks the repeated legal inconsistencies.
"Does an innocent person start a fight with an armed policeman, then act surprised and angry when the policemen and others defend one of their own?" (Gary Mack)
Upon the basis of Mack's previous claims, I would guess the answer he seeks is no. Yet without proof, the answer is premature and many lesser offenders have fought with police officers and often act surprised when overwhelming force is used. To observe this, view publicly available police arrest videos for lesser crimes.iii Resisting arrest does not conclusively prove guilt of high crimes, and Mack cites the photograph occurred shortly after a brutal encounter with Oswald. Yet the cigar-chomping official has a smile, some may speculate any sign of fighting previously could be exaggerated based upon this demeanor. However, I would not state broad photographic inferences might reveal the deeper complexities of this case.
"Such is the enigma of Lee Harvey Oswald, who spent the last 48 hours of his life denying he had shot anyone rather than taking credit for removing a president and a cop - two fathers cut down in their prime." (Gary Mack )
Again, Mack offers bias in favor of Lee Harvey Oswald's sole guilt despite the contending primary evidence. Perhaps the greater enigma is no consideration regarding Oswald's lack of practice, improvised weapon modifications, and outdated weapon.iv v vi All the contended medical evidence and the exhibits are forgotten and Mack chides Oswald for cutting down two men without conclusive proof. This brings us to the article's title "The End of Conspiracy", which is a hopeful if unrealistic statement. Mack seems to ignore any feasible evidence of conspiracy in the case, much like the FBI under Hoover.vii viii ix x xi Mack only considers the possible implications this specific photograph can glean about the nefarious intentions of Lee Harvey Oswald. Ultimately, this was a quixotic endeavor and no one can solve the case or make conclusive grand hypothesis based on a single photograph. Yet this does not dissuade some from attempting to do so.
C. A. A. Savastano
i. Gary Mack (November 22, 2013), An End to Conspiracy? Rare Photo of Lee Harvey Oswald's Arrest Suggests Why He's Guilty, Time Magazine, lightbox.time.com
ii. Report of the President's Commission, Chapter 4, Oswald at the Window, Eyewitness Identification of the Assassin, pp. 143-47
iii. Simon Shaykhet, (January 21, 2014), Wild arrest in Detroit caught on video, The Detroit News, wxyz.com
iv. Report of the Pres. Com., Chapter 4, the Assassin, Oswald's rifle practice outside the Marines, p. 192
v. Report of the Pres. Com., Chapter 4 the Assassin, Ownership and Possession of Assassination Weapon, p. 125
vi. Hearings of the President's Com., Volume XXVI, Commission Exhibit 2974, p. 455.
vii. Letter from J. Edgar Hoover to the Department of State, Subject: Lee Harvey Oswald/Internal Security, June 3, 1960, p. 2, 3. National Archives and Records Administration Identification: 1993:06.19.08: 07:11:000000
viii. Hearings of the Pres. Com., Vol. XVII, Ex. 833, United States Department of Justice, Federal Bureau of Investigation Memo from Hoover to Rankin, April 6, 1964, p. 787
ix. Senate Select Committee on Intelligence Activities Report, Book 5, Appendix A, pp. 90, 91
x. Senate Select Comm. on Intelligence Activities Report, Bk. 5, Intelligence Agencies, Part III Summary and Findings, p. 32
xi. Senate Select Comm. on Intelligence Activities Report, Bk. 5, Part I, p. 5
Belief and Evidence
Edited March 2018