If this version is true...

If this is the version they went with (which is very possible), I am not sure why they chose to change some of the facts that have been agreed upon by historians.

- The first shot was the shot that missed of the three - Here it is shown as the second - Also, it is debated that Oswald couldn't have shot through the scope and got the three shots off... It is believed he used the sight (it has been tested both ways, and through the site seems to be the only way it was possible to get the three shots off in the time he did).

- The way Oswald left the morning of the assination did not happen like that, and he also left her money with his ring.

- Jackie lost her baby in August and Marina had her second child (Rachel) in October - The film acts as if it happened around the same time.

- When Oswald shoots Tippit the guys in the truck who claimed to see the shooting was much further away, and they most certainly did not look at each other.

- Oswald was followed by a shoe salesman to the theatre, and he is the one who told the cashier to call the police.

- THE BIGGEST ONE is that when the police officer went up to Oswald in the theatre, Oswald yelled at him "It's all over now" and jumped up. The officer asked him to raise his hands and then the officer reached for Oswald's gun and that is when Oswald pulled it from his pants... In this film he basically whispers the line to himself and he jumps up to shoot the officer but the gun is empty.

I know a lot of people will complain that this movie is completely factual and that Oswald was a patsy and they may be right. All I am saying is, if you are going to tell the story in the way this movie tells it, why make little changes like this? The way historains believe it happened wouldn't have changed the perceived outcome.