I think the part that interests me, though, is that there is a certain tendency to dismiss such things as unimportant. To say, "even if it X were true, it means nothing". When any reasonable person might say, "that is a rather odd occurrence".
Why?
A reasonable person would read up on Oswald and learn that while he was a complex individual, he was wannabe. Everything about Oswald was odd from day one. He was the product of a crazy mother.
I don’t understand where that thought comes from. If a person has a whole, intact, one dollar bill in their wallet that would raise little interest. But to have two unique halves…that seems a lot more odd. Especially when you look at the overall context.
Cool, let's look at the "context".
1. We can't confirm these dollar halves were even in his wallet.
2. In this case the CTists have a point, due to DPD's handling of BOTH wallets they could be ruled inadmissible in a court of law. If I was his lawyer I'd push that angle.
3. In 1963, $1 was serious cash, and a torn bill can be taken to any bank to be replaced with a whole bill. In 1963, banks closed at 5PM, and were not open on weekends, thus who knows how long those bill-halves had been in his wallet while he waited for an opportunity to exchange them? In the context of 1963, combined with Oswald's finances, this is the more likely scenario.
4. Speculation is not proof.
Doesn't matter what was in his wallet. All that matters is his rifle, with his prints, was found on the 6th floor - his work station - of the Texas School Book Depository, and the bullets recovered from the limo, and JFK's head, match the rifle. The gun used to kill Officer JD Tippit was the same gun taken FROM OSWALD'S HAND by another DPD officer whom he was attempting to shoot during apprehension.
In 59 years nobody has been able to link Oswald, the lone shooter, to any larger group of actors on any level. Maybe someday someone will do this, and it will have nothing to do with the alleged dollar fragments.
