OK, I'm bored, so let's examine this. It's not a matter of what I think Oswald "should" have done. It's a matter of what it seems to me that someone of Oswald's intelligence who was thinking rationally would have done;
Either way you are guessing and your guesses do not trump real evidence that indicates Oswald was the assassin.
since that isn't what he did, I wonder why he did what he did (or if he actually did it) and do not immediately leap to the typical LN responses of "it's irrelevant"
Your guesses are irrelevant.
(well, no it's not) or "Oswald was a madman" (well, no, he wasn't). Yes, he made an unusual trip to Irving the evening before the JFKA - highly suspicious.
On the other hand, both Ruth and Marina accepted that he was there to try to make peace with Marina, and he made great efforts to do exactly that. The extent of those efforts and his reactions that Marina described are "just a bit" hard to explain if he was really there to get his rifle and shoot JFKA.
Hard for you. Not hard for people who think real evidence outweighs guesses.
Neither Ruth nor Marina saw anything like the mysterious paper bag or any conduct by Oswald suggesting he was taking the rifle out of the blanket and wrapping it in the bag.
Since you are into guessing, do you guess he would have allowed them to see what he was up to?
Indeed, as Martin has pointed out, there is no solid evidence that the rifle was even in the garage on 11-21.
Now it's my turn to ask the same question you asked in another thread. What evidence would you expect there to be.
No one saw him making the bag in the TSBD,
Which in no way precludes him from having made the bag. Same question as before. Do you think he would have wanted anyone to see what he was doing?
which would have been an odd choice anyway, and Frazier neither saw nor heard any evidence of it on the ride to Irving.
Would he have had any reason to show Frazier his bag?
Then, of course, we have Frazier's and Randle's stubborn insistence that the bag they saw was too short
Oh goody. More guesses by witnesses. Or did either Frazier or Randle actually measure the bag.
It may well be that the LN version of events is 100% correct,
It is.
but to suggest it's free of all doubt goes too far.
Not really.
Moreover, we encounter this at virtually every stage of the JFKA. For some reason, we weren't blessed with a cut-and-dried case that Perry Mason could've wrapped up in an hour.
At every stage of the JFKA, a CT will dream up some cockamamie excuse to dismiss a piece of rock solid evidence of Oswald's guilt. I've seen this movie countless times over the past 35 years. A CT is presented with compelling evidence of Oswald's guilt and the CT responds with an excuse to disregard that evidence. They do it time and tine again. They never respond with any evidence of their own nor do they even attempt to put together an alternative scenario that takes into account all the available evidence. One would think that given the advantage of 62 years, some CT somewhere would have been able to construct a plausible evidence based scenario that has someone other than Oswald involved in the crime but that has never happened and I have no reason to believe it ever will.
