Oswald's Motive

[Steve M. Galbraith]

In his December 9, 1963 Dan Smoot Report, Dan writes that: “Oswald was a psychotic misanthrope.” After studying the case for many years, I think that he may have been right.

Hmm, I think he had moral agency; he wasn't driven by voices or demons. But he wasn't a normal person. Below is from the Nechiporenko book on Oswald at the Soviet Embassy. This is a man with a persecution complex, someone who feels his life is in danger. That might be a form of psychosis I guess. I'll leave the psychoanalysis to others.

Of course the conspiracy believers will say this was an impersonator, it was the CIA framing him. Round-and-round we go.

[Jon Banks]

Hmm, I think he had moral agency; he wasn't driven by voices or demons. But he wasn't a normal person. Below is from the Nechiporenko book on Oswald at the Soviet Embassy. This is a man with a persecution complex, someone who feels his life is in danger. Of course the conspiracy believers will say this was an impersonator, it was the CIA framing him. Round-and-round we go.

I don't believe that Oswald really intended to go back to Russia. It is clear based on his personal writings and things he told to people close to him that he disliked life in the Soviet Union.

We don't know what the true intentions of his mysterious trip to Mexico City were and may never know.

[Bill Chapman]

Sorry, no. Even the worst of people - child killers? what's worse? - deserve a fair trial, due process. If you accept vigilantism here, in this case, how do you stop it tomorrow? If it's you?

There's a scene from the movie "Man For All Seasons" where More defends the rule of law. Even the devil deserves it; because if you remove the rule of law where do you go when you're the one being sought? And by the Devil himself? The law protects both the Devil and you. Besides, had we had a trial I am absolutely sure that we wouldn't be here. Oswald would have, implicitly if not explicitly, confessed. Sure the "Oswald was brainwashed by MK-Ultra" types would defend him but they would be in the Holocaust denial/911 Truthers far fringe.

Here's the critical exchange:

'Oswald had no chance to defend himself', said some Oswald apologist
Well, neither did Kennedy

What went around came around
RIP Officer Tippit

[Steve M. Galbraith]

'Oswald had no chance to defend himself', said some Oswald apologist
Well, neither did Kennedy

What went around came around
RIP Officer Tippit

And what happened to JFK - an injustice - calls for or justifies another injustice? If what happened to JFK was wrong, as it was, does that justify another one? This is what More meant above. If you toss out the rule of law in one case, make an exception, then how do you prevent the next one?

What about other killers? Child rapists, murderers? How about the parents of a child killed? Can they kill that killer? They are victims of an injustice every bit if not more than the Kennedys. No, this is the path to anarchism and vigilantism.

[Charles Collins]

Hmm, I think he had moral agency; he wasn't driven by voices or demons. But he wasn't a normal person. Below is from the Nechiporenko book on Oswald at the Soviet Embassy. This is a man with a persecution complex, someone who feels his life is in danger. That might be a form of psychosis I guess. I'll leave the psychoanalysis to others.

Of course the conspiracy believers will say this was an impersonator, it was the CIA framing him. Round-and-round we go.

That description of the encounter in MC reminds me so much of a kid pitching a temper tantrum so that his mommy will cave in and give him what he wants. I can’t help but think that this is probably what happened between LHO and his mother way too many times.

I haven’t yet found his exact words, but Robert Oswald wrote that he noticed a pattern in LHO’s behavior. Whenever LHO failed at something or things didn’t go as he wanted, he then proceeded to do something outrageous [Possibly an adult substitute for a childish temper tantrum?]. Defecting to Russia was an example. Assassinating JFK was the ultimate outrageous act.

[Bill Chapman]

And what happened to JFK - an injustice - calls for or justifies another injustice? If what happened to JFK was wrong, as it was, does that justify another one? This is what More meant above. If you toss out the rule of law in one case, make an exception, then how do you prevent the next one?

What about other killers? Child rapists, murderers? How about the parents of a child killed? Can they kill that killer? They are victims of an injustice every bit if not more than the Kennedys. No, this is the path to anarchism and vigilantism.

Oswald paid for what he did
RIP Officer Tippit

[Charles Collins]

Oswald paid for what he did
RIP Officer Tippit

We live in a land of laws which are there to protect the rights of individuals, so there should be no approval of what Ruby did.


That said, there were a lot of people who were glad that Ruby shot LHO. There are plenty of telegrams in evidence, that were sent from people all over, congratulating Ruby.  I have to confess that, as a ten year old, my first reaction was mixed. Part of me was glad, but I knew it was wrong.

Part of me still wants to say it was poetic justice:

Poetic irony (a.k.a. poetic justice) occurs when a crime or transgression is unexpectedly resolved positively, often due to a 'twist of fate. ' In other words, karma — you get what you deserve. This is very closely related to cosmic irony because there is a sense that the Universe stepped in to balance the scales.

But deep down inside I agree with Steve that it should not be condoned.