circumlocution

I'm in Tokyo and was awoken by the quake hitting here at 7:33; you can really feel the building sway on higher floors

If you follow the article link they reference a WHO (another UN organization) report regarding their position and review of research:

https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/B09424

You're very welcome, he gives a similar video rundown on Jack the Ripper; in both cases I find it fascinating how messy real life investigations are.

I didn't read all the source material researched for the video myself, so I'd take all this with a grain of salt, but I personally consider Lemmino reliable. Based on his presentation of the evidence I think it was just Lee Harvey Oswald taking an attack of opportunity. It seems likely he was working at the building by happenstance, heard/read that the motercade would pass by, and hasily planned the assassination in secret. He had a motive that doesn't require any conspiracy as he was self admittedly a marxist and was described as "unstable". To me, his murder of a police officer immediately following the assassination is indicative of mental instability rather than a carefully planned conspiracy. I also consider the reports of multiple gunshots unreliable; I remember being nearby Parliment in Ottawa during the 2014 shootings at Parliment Hill. There was incredible confusion when it started, and rumours and miscommunications travelled at lightning speed since everyone feared for their lives. At first there were reports of multiple gunman in several different locations near the actual shooting because of echoes off of nearby buildings and return fire from police. Really it was a lone gunman, and despite those inital reports I'm not aware of any conspiracies about the whole event. I think the true conspiracy, if any, was that any of the people involved who failed in their role to prevent the assassination of the president by a lone unstable man, or to conduct a flawless investigation following it, were incentivized to bend evidence and testimoney in their favour (whether unconsciously or intentionally). I don't think this was done out of malice, rather, who would want to admit to any actions that could conceivably invite criticism? In the article itself he provides several (perhaps reasonable) reasons for why he moved the bullet at all, probably to defend against criticism that leaving all evidence in place (seems to me) would have been the best course of action. As for the article itself, human memory is notoriously unreliable (even shortly after shocking events like this), so even if he beleives he is telling the truth, and isn't interested in the profit motive, I don't think it's compelling enough evidence to believe in a conspiracy beyond human fallacy.

To those who haven't seen it, I'd really recommend Lemmino's video on the assassination https://youtu.be/5u7euN1HTuU?feature=shared He dives pretty deep into the details, and it helped me form my own opinion of what probably happened