"Contingencies for multiple scenarios" is not an explanation of anything. That is just meaningless gibberish. Why would someone plant Oswald's wallet at the Tippit scene and then suppress it? Do you agree, for example, that finding Oswald's wallet at the Tippit murder scene would have been great evidence to link him to that crime? In fact, that would be the apparent purpose for anyone to have planted it there. And if these "powerful" people in charge of the evidence had the ability to suppress a wallet, it would have been Oswald's arrest wallet they suppressed and the official story would have been that Oswald dropped his wallet in the confusion during his murder of Tippit. Thereby establishing an iron clad link from Oswald to the Tippit murder. Anyone who believes Oswald guilty of the Tippit murder would be delighted with confirmation that his wallet was found there. Sadly, it was not. And how do you explain whoever first found the alleged wallet not radioing out the identity of the person who the wallet belonged? Any police officer that found such a wallet at the crime scene would immediately have linked it to the missing suspect and relayed that information to the dispatcher to be on the lookout for that person. We know that didn't happen.
It's pretty simple all you have do is to imagine, or except in the abstract, that groups of people can or do conspire, yep I am going to use the forbidden term, to commit crime or intelligence operations Certainly you are not going to suggest that our own intelligence agencies do not plan for contingencies?
Walt I did my best to search online for anything resembling the picture you are referring to Not much more I can do to address your claim