Well!
Mr Oswald told a clear and consistent story in custody, and the 'investigating' authorities privy to what he said were able to quickly establish that he was telling the truth. But they had a clear brief: nail the assassination on this guy and this guy alone.
One of the parties privy to Mr Oswald's alibi was, of course, Captain Will Fritz. Let's look at this interesting exchange during his WC testimony:
Mr. BALL. Did you ask him what happened that day; where he had been?
Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir.
Mr. BALL. What did he say?
Mr. FRITZ. Well he told me that he was eating lunch with some of the employees when this happened
Captain Fritz has worded this vaguely enough to avoid telling an outright lie---------he achieves this by carefully leaving out the WHERE (front steps)
, and that he saw all the excitement and he didn't think--I also asked him why he left the building. He said there was so much excitement there then that "I didn't think there would be any work done that afternoon and we don't punch a clock and they don't keep very close time on our work and I just left."
Mr. BALL. At that time didn't you know that one of your officers, Baker, had seen Oswald on the second floor?
Mr. FRITZ. They told me about that down at the bookstore; I believe Mr. Truly or someone told me about it, told me they had met him--I think he told me, person who told me about, I believe told me that
Captain Fritz is noticeably flustered here. He's trying hard not to tell a direct lie about this matter
they met him on the stairway, but our investigation shows that he actually saw him in a lunchroom, a little lunchroom where they were eating, and he held his gun on this man and Mr. Truly told him that he worked there, and the officer let him go.
'our investigation shows'?? Why did it take an investigation to show something different to what Captain Fritz was told on site? And more to the point: Why did it take an investigation to show what Mr Oswald readily confirmed in his first interrogation?
Mr. BALL. Did you question Oswald about that?
Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir; I asked him about that and he knew that the officer stopped him all right.
Captain Fritz is carefully avoiding naming the WHERE again, in order to SEEM to say but not ACTUALLY say that Mr Oswald confirmed a second-floor lunchroom encounter with an officer
Mr. BALL. Did you ask him what he was doing in the lunchroom?
Mr. FRITZ. He said he was having his lunch. He had a cheese sandwich and a Coca-Cola.
Mr. BALL. Did he tell you he was up there to get a Coca-Cola?
Mr. FRITZ. He said he had a Coca-Cola.
Again note Captain Fritz's refusal to commit to a straight yes as to whether Mr Oswald told him 'he was up there to get a Coca-Cola'; he merely confirms that Mr Oswald 'said he had a Coca-Cola'. Yet again, he is carefully leaving out the WHERE ('UP there'). Why? In order to give the erroneous impression that Mr Oswald here meant the second-floor lunchroom rather than the first-floor domino room. (Mr Oswald told him he ate some of his lunch in the domino room before bringing the remainder outside to watch the P. Parade.)