Establishing Shelley lied about his movements after the assassination has important ramifications.
It shows he was trying to cover something up and that he was more than willing to lie to the various investigating authorities on multiple occasions.
It also casts huge doubts over other statements made by Shelley which are of huge significance in regard to the aftermath of the assassination.
The first one I'd like to examine is related to Oswald's alibi.
Oswald may have been a lot of things but he was not stupid.
When a person gives an alibi to the police they know they have gone on record and that this is the version of events that will be used against them in a court of law. For anyone accused of a crime, the most important element of their defence is the alibi. They also know that once the alibi is given it will be checked to see how 'cast iron' it is. If someone is giving a false alibi it must be one that is incredibly difficult to verify or one that has been agreed with an accomplice.
Looking through the various notes and reports pertaining to Oswald's interrogation, his alibi has a few different elements.
According to what Oswald reportedly said -
1] He was in the lunch room on the first floor (the Domino Room) when JFK drove by the building.
2] After this he went up to the second floor lunchroom to buy a Coke
3] He bought the Coke and was drinking it when Baker burst in, gun drawn.
4] He went back down to the first floor.
5] He finished his lunch and, possibly while he was finishing it, got together with Bill Shelley.
6] Shelley told him there would be no more work that day and that it was okay for him to take the rest of the day off.
7] Oswald left the building.
Firstly, there is no way to verify that Oswald was in the Domino Room when JFK passed by. Although Oswald does seem to confirm this with his mention of Junior Jarman and, presumably, Hank Norman. The only time he could have seen these two men together on the first floor is when they entered the back door of the TSBD building on their way up to the fifth floor. Because the east elevator wasn't available Jarman and Norman had to walk around the elevators to get the west elevator. Walking around the elevators would have brought them into line of sight for someone sat in the Domino room. This makes Oswald's apparent mention of seeing these men together compelling evidence supporting his assertion he was in the first floor lunchroom at the time JFK went by.
Unfortunately for Oswald, neither Jarman nor Norman saw him so there is no direct alibi.
Secondly, the second floor lunchroom encounter is well attested to and seems to be confirmed by Oswald, Baker and Truly (not to mention Mrs Robert Reid who saw Oswald close to the lunchroom with a Coke in his hand a couple of minutes after the assassination). There is a wrinkle - Oswald appears to make it clear he had already bought his Coke and was sipping it when Baker burst in, something supported by Baker's initial report in which he had written Oswald was already drinking a Coke when the encounter occurred but which was then crudely crossed out. This really buggers up the timeline for Oswald allegedly getting down from the sixth floor to the second floor lunchroom. Whatever the case, there is ample confirmation that Oswald was indeed in the second floor lunchroom seconds after the assassination.
The third element to Oswald's alibi is his interaction with Bill Shelley. Apparently, Oswald credits Bill Shelley with his motive for leaving the building. The importance of this cannot be stressed enough because it is Oswald's choice to leave the TSBD that alerts the authorities to him. It is his decision to 'flee the scene' that puts him well and truly in the spotlight as a prime suspect on the day of the assassination. Even if he actually pulled the trigger, he has no reason to run immediately. He has already encountered the police, seconds after the shooting, four floors below the location of the shooting and has been given a pass. They can't immediately trace the rifle to him, they can't use fingerprint evidence against him on the day. All he has to do is hold his nerve, say he was on the second floor lunchroom all along and skip town later that day. But instead he runs.
So let's imagine that he is the shooter and is trying to come up with a false alibi. One that will stick in a court of law.
Why on earth would he add the detail that he'd talked to Bill Shelley after the lunchroom incident and it was Bill Shelley who recommended he leave for the day? He saw Shelley as he was being taken into the interview and Shelley, who was having his affidavit taken, had to vacate the same room. So Oswald knows that all they have to do is ask Shelley if such a conversation took place. Which they did. And Shelley denied it.
This is the point of what I'm getting at. I may have certain details wrong but the bottom line is that Oswald reportedly included Shelley as part of his alibi.
Why did he do that?
Maybe he just thought that, by some miracle, Shelley would back him up. That, although this incident never happened, Shelley would somehow know, when being questioned, that Oswald was asking him to lie to the police on his behalf and back him up.
Or maybe he did talk to Shelley after the lunchroom incident and Shelley knowingly denied it (due to a lack of imagination, I can't really come up with a third option.)
So, which of these two options makes sense - that Oswald was so utterly stupid as to include Shelley in a false alibi or that Oswald was telling the truth about this chat with Shelley, which is why he felt comfortable telling his interrogators about it?
I would argue it is the second option. Furthermore, it is as if Oswald fully expected Shelley to back him up on this. Why else say it?
So, it's looking like Shelley also lied about this chat with Oswald after the second floor lunchroom incident and before Oswald left the building - a timespan of 3 to 4 minutes after the assassination.
Thoughts?
