[small voice in the wilderness]

Hey, I don’t mind being proved stupid. But they’re going to have to start by proving WHY Ruby killed Oswald, NOT why Oswald acted alone. So far...no...answers..

[REDWOOD99]

Check this link. It’s footnoted so you can check further if you wish.

http://www.jfk-online.com/rubydef.html

I believe that Ruby told the truth- he just wanted revenge and to save Mrs. Kennedy from having to face her husband’s killer at trial. What else could Ruby have possibly gained from killing Oswald? Money? Prove it.

[mlo]

Hey, I don’t mind being proved stupid. But they’re going to have to start by proving WHY Ruby killed Oswald, NOT why Oswald acted alone. So far...no...answers..

Actually, no. It's not necessary to prove a motive to prove what happened or didn't happen. Crimes aren't solved by proving motive.

However, providing a motive for Ruby that has nothing to do with any conspiracy is not a problem. Just read Ruby's own testimony to the Warren Commission.