Jump to content
The Education Forum

Yes, postal money orders do require bank endorsements!


Sandy Larsen

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 657
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

4 hours ago, David Josephs said:

And finally... I've written a paper which proves the FBI could not have found C2766 that weekend given the information provided by FELDSOTT...   and is documented within FBI reports from that weekend 

1971495507_FBIreport11-22-63fromFeldsottinterview-howdotheyknowaboutJune181962shipmenttoKleinsofN2766-compositecopy.thumb.jpg.d5a7bf92e9e6c67dcc4fafec6f79de8a.jpg

 

 

For the record, SA Joseph Chapman made a mistake in that memo on the top right. He says:

This is pointed out in view of the statement in Chicago teletype to the effect that the weapon shipped to P.O. Box 2915 at Dallas was a weapon bearing Serial Number C 2766, but that the records of Klein at Chicago disclosed that received from Crescent Firearms Co., DBA Folsom Firearms Co., Yonkers, NY, shipped rifle Serial Number N2766 and Serial Number C2746.

Well here’s the Chicago teletype he’s referencing: 

https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=62266#relPageId=33

Note the key statement “New York tel advised”. The referenced New York tel is the same one you posted on the left above, which was sent by SA Paul Brana at 9:41 p.m. CST on the 22nd. Now let’s compare the language in the New York and Chicago tels:

New York: 

Crescent Firearms Company, Also DBA Folsom Firearms Company, Yonkers, New York, shipped rifle SN N2766 to Klein’s Sporting Goods, Chicago, Illinois, on 6/18/82. Also shipped to Klein’s on 3/27/63 rifle with SN C2746.

Chicago: 

Crescent Firearms Company, Also DBA Folsom Firearms Company, Yonkers, New York, shipped rifle SN N2766 to Klein’s Sporting Goods, Chicago, Illinois, on 6/18/82. Also shipped to Klein’s on 3/27/63 rifle with SN C2746. 

It’s identical. In fact, the first section of the 8:01 a.m. Chicago teletype is actually a verbatim transcription of the entire 9:41 p.m. New York teletype, minus the last two sentences.

Basically, Chapman misinterpreted Chicago’s transcription of the 9:41 p.m. New York teletype as information obtained during the search of Klein’s Sporting Goods receiving records in Chicago, when it was actually a reference to shipping records obtained at Crescent. If we need more proof - which we don’t but what the hell - let’s take a look at the second page of the New York tel: 

Crescent Firearms Company believes Klein’s sold similar rifles with and without scopes, and used scopes made in Japan mounted on bases made by Ordnance Optics, Inc. Chicago immediately contact Klein’s Sporting Goods regarding rifle SN C2766. Check disposition of rifles SN N2766 and SN C2746 in view of possibility of error in recording numbers. Sutel Dallas and New York Tonite. 

This is the reason that Chicago contacted Klein’s. However, instead of reporting the disposition of the N2766 and C2746 rifles, Chicago jumped right in and started looking through microfilm customer sales records, as you know. The 8:01 a.m. Chicago tel confirms this: 

Upon location of rifle SN C2766 search for other rifles mentioned in RE: New York tel discontinued. 

Well that settles it. Chicago never reported on any Klein’s receiving records of N2766 and C2746. Chapman screwed up. It’s a fact.

The 11/30/63 Gemberling report is indeed a mystery, since New York never reported to Dallas (or anyone) that C2766 was shipped from Crescent on 6/18/62, and Gemberling should have had all the early teletypes from New York. I think the most likely explanation is Gemberling made a mistake skimming the 9:41 p.m. New York tel in the rush to complete his initial report - but I have to admit it’s a strange mistake, especially since Gemberling should have known that a record of C2766 at Crescent was NOT discovered on the 22nd.

New York reported unequivocally and to the entire FBI that Crescent Firearms did NOT sell the rifle to anyone at 12:45 a.m. CST on the 23rd. This position was not reversed for over 24 hours - including ~10 hours after the specific invoice number was provided by Chicago: 

https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=62264#relPageId=68

This teletype was sent to Dallas, so Gemberling should have had it. However, Gemberling appears to contradict himself in the span of two paragraphs by mentioning the 2/7/63 shipment reported by Waldman - a reference to a Chicago teletype from 5:39 p.m. on the 23rd - so I think the rushed/mistake theory is probably what actually happened.

Edited by Tom Gram
Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Tom Gram

C2746 is shipped to KLEINS per FBI report posted above from an order on MARCH 27, 1963

N2766 is shipped to KLEINS per FBI report on JUNE 18, 1962

Agreed?

Now can you please tell me what you are trying to say?  

C2766 was placed on an order from FEB 21, 1963 with 99 other rifles, arriving Feb 22

This critical page matches serial #'s to VC #'s. and while there are copying artifacts all over the page, there are none behind or around any of these serial #'s.  Furthermore, the actual original order "1259" is shown at the top right.5a95acf8a97aa_Kleinsserielnumbervclist-WH_Vol21_0362a.thumb.gif.fc33feaed733b8403ff745c23cfbaaf1.gif

This document was created by Michael Scibor.. you might read up on him a bit.

Point I was making was that on the 2 orders that ACTUALLY EXISTED IN REAL LIFE, the June 1962 and March 1963... the rifle they were looking for was not sent to KLEINS.

Since this thread is about the Money Order I'd like to bring this to a head by mentioning "self-substantiating evidence"

The "blank form" uses the VC#=Serial# to match back to this document to PROVE they are the same and was C2766
The prove each other yet prove nothing else.

The Money Order is also a piece of self substantiating evidence as there is no PMO book from which it was pulled despite Holmes' statement.  and there is not a single record ANYWHERE of any one of the other 99 rifles from this FEB order winding up in the hands of ANYONE ANYWHERE in the world.

Century International Arms (CIA) on the other hand shipped a 2766 40" rifle to ALDENS of Chicago July 5, 1962 after having received such rifles on an invoice dated June 29, 1962.

529538813_FBID-103CenturyArmsships2766toVermont.jpg.bcc5cf9323fc4a851cda2b2f777df42e.jpg

There never was a FEB 1963 shipment of FC rifles.  There never were 100 rifles received, 50 of which listed below.  There are 5 more serial numbers on the Century order which match 5 rifles in this bogus Feb order...

And finally Tom, please read about how those men at Klein's that night went about finding this order blank... you can read about it in one of my articles at K&K.

Everything related to the rifle is a PROP with one of the most crucial connections in all the case - HIDELL.

A man walks up to Ken Croy at the Tippit murder scene, hands him a wallet (per Croy) and says he found this at the scene.  Croy gives this wallet to WESTBROOK at the scene.  WESTBROOK opens said wallet showing FBI BARRETT the names OSWALD and HIDELL asking if he knows either one.  That wallet disappears, is not in inventory and is never mentioned again... but the HIDELL ID - which is the only thing connecting OSWALD to the Money Order and Rifle - becomes part of the infamous "wallet inventory" as recorded by the FBI on the 22nd and 24th.

As Sandy would say... "Easy".  :up

 

Edit:  I've also traced the italian shipment of those packing slips and find that it was actually C2765, NOT 2766

image.jpeg.070aaae679b3e776b3f103b27c89958c.jpeg

 

 

2134947076_rifle-c2766-comparison-smaller.jpg.afca0ea922a411f88707dddae5bc94f8.jpg

 

 

The owner of Crescent in NY signs an "after the fact pre-written affidavit" stating C2766 was sent on JUNE 18, 1962

1690780697_Feldsottaffidavit-andRankinletterstatingitwasalreadywrittenandreadytobesigned.thumb.jpg.8ec936e7a43272d22f2ac2070fad444a.jpg

Edited by David Josephs
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, David Josephs said:

@Tom Gram

C2746 is shipped to KLEINS per FBI report posted above from an order on MARCH 27, 1963

N2766 is shipped to KLEINS per FBI report on JUNE 18, 1962

Agreed?

Now can you please tell me what you are trying to say?  

C2766 was placed on an order from FEB 21, 1963 with 99 other rifles, arriving Feb 22

This critical page matches serial #'s to VC #'s. and while there are copying artifacts all over the page, there are none behind or around any of these serial #'s.  Furthermore, the actual original order "1259" is shown at the top right.

This document was created by Michael Scibor.. you might read up on him a bit.

Point I was making was that on the 2 orders that ACTUALLY EXISTED IN REAL LIFE, the June 1962 and March 1963... the rifle they were looking for was not sent to KLEINS.

Since this thread is about the Money Order I'd like to bring this to a head by mentioning "self-substantiating evidence"

The "blank form" uses the VC#=Serial# to match back to this document to PROVE they are the same and was C2766
The prove each other yet prove nothing else.

The Money Order is also a piece of self substantiating evidence as there is no PMO book from which it was pulled despite Holmes' statement.  and there is not a single record ANYWHERE of any one of the other 99 rifles from this FEB order winding up in the hands of ANYONE ANYWHERE in the world.

Century International Arms (CIA) on the other hand shipped a 2766 40" rifle to ALDENS of Chicago July 5, 1962 after having received such rifles on an invoice dated June 29, 1962.

There never was a FEB 1963 shipment of FC rifles.  There never were 100 rifles received, 50 of which listed below.  There are 5 more serial numbers on the Century order which match 5 rifles in this bogus Feb order...

And finally Tom, please read about how those men at Klein's that night went about finding this order blank... you can read about it in one of my articles at K&K.

Everything related to the rifle is a PROP with one of the most crucial connections in all the case - HIDELL.

A man walks up to Ken Croy at the Tippit murder scene, hands him a wallet (per Croy) and says he found this at the scene.  Croy gives this wallet to WESTBROOK at the scene.  WESTBROOK opens said wallet showing FBI BARRETT the names OSWALD and HIDELL asking if he knows either one.  That wallet disappears, is not in inventory and is never mentioned again... but the HIDELL ID - which is the only thing connecting OSWALD to the Money Order and Rifle - becomes part of the infamous "wallet inventory" as recorded by the FBI on the 22nd and 24th.

As Sandy would say... "Easy".  :up

529538813_FBID-103CenturyArmsships2766toVermont.jpg.bcc5cf9323fc4a851cda2b2f777df42e.jpg2134947076_rifle-c2766-comparison-smaller.jpg.afca0ea922a411f88707dddae5bc94f8.jpg

5a95acf8a97aa_Kleinsserielnumbervclist-WH_Vol21_0362a.thumb.gif.fc33feaed733b8403ff745c23cfbaaf1.gif

The owner of Crescent in NY signs an "after the fact pre-written affidavit" stating C2766 was sent on JUNE 18, 1962

1690780697_Feldsottaffidavit-andRankinletterstatingitwasalreadywrittenandreadytobesigned.thumb.jpg.8ec936e7a43272d22f2ac2070fad444a.jpg

The rant on Joseph Chapman was just to correct something minor that has been misreported by JFK researchers for years. Everyone who’s ever cited that 11/23 memo missed that Chapman made a mistake in writing that the Chicago FBI found receiving records for the N2766 and C2746 rifles at Klein’s. They did not.

I do not agree with your Waldman 4 theory. The grain/copying thing from a multigen xerox doesn’t tell us much; and more importantly, the order of the SNs on the sheet is not random. It is exactly how one would expect SNs to be logged in a multi-person unpacking operation. Also, a few of the SN’s do not match the SNs on the shipping slips, which suggests that some of the slips were in error and the SNs were pulled off of actual rifles. 

https://reopenkennedycase.forumotion.net/t2455-david-josephs-is-wrong-about-waldman-exhibit-4

Last thing, your Klein’s Rifle essay contains several errors regarding the shipping slips. You note, correctly, that Waldman turned over his “customer’s invoice” set to the FBI when he was reinterviewed in March ‘64 on behalf of the WC. However, you missed that Feldsott also (supposedly) turned over his “office copy” set during the same March ‘64 investigation: 

https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=62320#relPageId=20

This EBF contains all the documents (supposedly) collected by SA O’Neill from Feldsott, including the “office copy” set of shipping slips (NOTE: it’s a crap copy and C2766 is illegible): 

https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=62321#relPageId=9

Feldsott also (supposedly) turned over the slips and a few other documents to Martin Greely during the initial interviews. These documents were (supposedly) copied by the FBI and returned to Feldsott until O’Neill scooped up the originals in March. I don’t have the link handy but Greely’s evidence slip is in the Blunt Archive. Greely backdated the slip to Nov. 22nd, which is provably false and I’m guessing was done to cover his own ass after how long it took him to find the Crescent records. 

I am very critical of the WC version of the rifle investigation, and we agree in general that the rifle investigation is misunderstood and full of bizarre contradictions, but I disagree with most of your conclusions; and think that a lot of the contradictions can be explained by some combination of incompetence and FBI ass covering vs. wholesale evidence fakery. 

I’d be happy to debate the nuances of the rifle evidence in another thread, and explain some of my “supposedlys”, but like you said, this is a thread on the money order so I’m signing off. 

Edited by Tom Gram
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Tom Gram said:

the order of the SNs on the sheet is not random. It is exactly how one would expect SNs to be logged in a multi-person unpacking operation.

Please explain... as these rifles are to match to the 10 packing slips and I've done the analysis of how they were recorded, by slip, and one would expect and entire 10 pack of rifles to be recorded as they are removed, and then on to the next 10 pack.  If you do the analysis, you will find this not to be so.

I think this is the essay you're referring to above...

https://www.kennedysandking.com/images/pdf/JosephsRiflePart1.pdf  go to page 26.  The order of these rifles is completely unrelated to the packing slips.  IOW it's as if they simply wrote down the 100 SN's next to (the now whited out area of the old SNs).  You tell me what you think.

8 hours ago, Tom Gram said:

Last thing, your Klein’s Rifle essay contains several errors regarding the shipping slips. You note, correctly, that Waldman turned over his “customer’s invoice” set to the FBI when he was reinterviewed in March ‘64 on behalf of the WC. However, you missed that Feldsott also (supposedly) turned over his “office copy” set during the same March ‘64 investigation:

The point of that mention was that WALDMAN also turned over these same 10 packing slips as evidence of receipt of said shipment.  the exact same slips that went to Feldsott.  You may remember that RUPP first inspects and replaces rifles which are defective - which in this case was plentiful.  The problem with these 10 slips from Waldman is that first, not a single original rifle in the original 10 packs of 10 was replaced, second Waldman claims these slips were mailed to him separately in a memo while RUPP sends them - corrected - with the shipment, and finally the designation at the top of each slip is "38 E" which is the international item reference for the 40" FC rifle.  If you look at all the other DOMESTIC reference to these rifles, they are "T-38"

This paper will present the evidence to show there is no way to connect a specific rifle to a
specific carton since Rupp** usually removes these rifles from their original cartons to fix and
clean and prepare them (Adams stopped paying Riva claiming he was not doing his job and
many of the rifles were arriving in bad repair). They are then repackaged in the same or new
cartons with updated packing info, not necessarily (and in most cases not) the same as those
that came from Italy, when they are shipped to Klein’s
. (The FBI via Waldman – VP Klein’s -
erroneously claims these packing slips from Italy are in fact the packing slips sent as memos
from the February shipment of 100 40” FC rifles to Klein’s of which C2766 is supposedly one of
them.)

Fred Rupp tells us via his FBI interview reports that he will use the same cartons if not mutilated
and that if a rifle is replaced it will be recorded on the packing slip which Rupp sends
with the shipment - “WITH the shipment”

 

1302357167_RuppexplainsthepackingslipprocesswhenshippingtoKleins.jpg.5cd1948dca405e7ecc3a6d8455f5dad2.jpg

 

9 hours ago, Tom Gram said:

This EBF contains all the documents (supposedly) collected by SA O’Neill from Feldsott, including the “office copy” set of shipping slips (NOTE: it’s a crap copy and C2766 is illegible): 

https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=62321#relPageId=9

ok.  One would expect the man who received the shipment from Italy to have the correct packing slips for those rifles.

My contention is that these 10 identical slips across Feldsott and Waldman is not possible given the RUPP process and the terrible condition of the rifles upon arrival.

Even more importantly, Kleins supposedly rec'd these 100 rifles in FEB 1963 with ads for the 36" and 40" rifles running virtually all year thru Nov 1963.  Don't you find it odd that not a single soul who would have gotten any one of these other 99 rifles AND now a published list of these infamous rifles - has ever come forward.

It's as if C2766 magically appears at the TSBD while the other 99 rifles simply never existed in Klein's inventory...

Also in the paper linked to above, I go into the Harborside warehouse and the records which shows the earleist removal of ANY of these rifles was AUGUST 29, 1962.  Feldsott's affidavit claims C2766 was shipped JUNE 18, 1962.

How dat? :huh:

There are a number of Rifle threads that we can resurrect and I'd be happen to discuss any aspect of the Rifle with you...

FWIW - have you seen my analysis of the rifle DAY removes... I am of the conclusion this was NOT the rifle ultimatley placed into evidence... along with the strange story of NAT PINKSTON

Look forward to it, just start a post with @David Josephs and we're off.

Namaste

873207218_RuppremovesriflesfromHarborside-norecordofserialnumbersandonlyHIScartonnumbersarekept-smaller.thumb.jpg.f05bc2dd21fe916b349073d1f7c623ab.jpg

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, David Josephs said:

The point of that mention was that WALDMAN also turned over these same 10 packing slips as evidence of receipt of said shipment.  the exact same slips that went to Feldsott.  You may remember that RUPP first inspects and replaces rifles which are defective - which in this case was plentiful.  The problem with these 10 slips from Waldman is that first, not a single original rifle in the original 10 packs of 10 was replaced, second Waldman claims these slips were mailed to him separately in a memo while RUPP sends them - corrected - with the shipment, and finally the designation at the top of each slip is "38 E" which is the international item reference for the 40" FC rifle.  If you look at all the other DOMESTIC reference to these rifles, they are "T-38"

They are not the same slips. Feldsott’s say “office copy” at the bottom and Waldman’s say “customer’s invoice”. They were turned over independently to the FBI at different, documented times. Feldsott’s slips did not become a WC exhibit, but they are in the FBI file I linked above. 

Rupp did not replace any of the rifles, but that’s exactly what he noted in his shipping book - which also did not become a WC exhibit. 

https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=11277#relPageId=53

You can see how he noted replacements for other shipments on the second page.

There is an apparent contradiction with the known June ‘62 shipment to Klein’s and no rifles being removed from Harborside until August, but the simplest explanation there is just that there was a different lot/shipment of rifles to Crescent from Italy. I don’t think anyone ever claimed that the October ‘60 shipment was the only shipment of Italian rifles, but I could be wrong on that. 

On Waldman 4, it’s all explained in that ROKC thread. I matched up every rifle on the list to the corresponding shipping slip/carton, and the SN logging order is exactly what you’d expect if the rifles were unpacked by a warehouse team. The order is not random. 

Waldman appears to have originally said the slips were sent with the cartons, then he claimed they were sent separately in his WC testimony. It’s hearsay, but Joseph Chapman wrote another memo on the 23rd reporting what he was told over the phone by the SAC in Chicago, which was sourced from Waldman: 

According to SAC Johnson, the records of Klein disclosed that affixed to the exterior of this crate was a series of tickets which are apparently made up in Italy and which tickets contained the Serial Numbers of the weapons being shipped in the crate to which they are attached. This particular crate did contain a ticket stating that subject matter rifle, Serial Number C 2766, was contained in this crate. 

I think both are probably true. We know there were multiple sets of slips with different labels on the bottom. There was an “office copy” set retained at Crescent, and a “customer’s invoice” set that was probably sent with the invoice just like Waldman said. According to Rupp, there was a third and fourth copy attached to the inside and outside of the actual crates, and I don’t see any reason to doubt that. 

I will make a thread at some point for more rifle ramblings. Probably this weekend. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Tom Gram said:

They are not the same slips. Feldsott’s say “office copy” at the bottom and Waldman’s say “customer’s invoice”

Stay with me for a second here Tom.

Feldsott's company buys rifles from Italy
These rifles are packed in cartons of 10 and master cartons of 10-10 packs
The only entity buying these rifles at this point is Feldsott's.
The shipment arrives at Crescent...  If you look at the "Customer Invoice" copy and the "Office copy" copy they are identical, as in they are carbons of each other with the same carton #'s and Slip #'s

Feldsott is the only customer of these rifles when these slips are sent to him.

The "Customer Invoice" copies are the property of FELDSOTT, not Klein's. Yet the FBI uses these to imply that KLEINS did get a shipment of these rifles in FEB 1963 and here, these are the slips.  

Simply: There never was a shipment of 100 rifles to KLEINS in FEB 1963 including C2766. Sorry if that's a shock.

Those slips had nothing whatsoever to do with KLEINS other than to justify the bogus FEB shipment which never occurred.

Feldsott himself states that C2766 was shipped JUNE 18, 1962 to KLEINS a full 2 months before the first batch of these rifles are even removed from Harborside. We can banter about anything you like but if the C2766 rifle is stored at Harborside from 1960 until the first orders are pulled from that 5200 lot in AUGUST 1962, and FELDSOTT's affidavit states C2766 was sent to KLEINS in a JUNE 18, 1962 order.  

That means C2766 was not part of the JUNE order.  The 2 sets of slips: Customer and Office were both Feldsott's.

How else can C2766 show up at KLEINS, labeled the international 38E but via these slips as proof.

Using these slips the bogus VC pages are created and the VC#, in pencil, is put onto the HIDELL order blank.
Full circle, self corroborating evidence as we are NEVER allowe3d to see any other orders for that rifle, any order for any of the other 99 rifles or any of the other 99 rifles are even seen 
physically.

I hope that's enough of this as I'm done debating 10 years of my life's work and countless hours with John, who dug up most of this rifle info in the first place and from which I have numerous of his notebooks providing much greater detail than we go into here.

===

I'm not sure if you're aware or not but FBI SA DOLAN signs a report stating he TAKES the microfilm from WALDMAN.  Next to this exhibit is one signed by DOLAN and 2 others (WCD7) stating that Waldman keeps the microfilm...  cant be both Tom.  This is followed by the revelation that a copy of this film was made.  John, having gone to the archives informed me that the microfilm canister which used to contain an actual film, was then empty.

 

 

1164879917_MicrofilmplacedattheLaSalleBankinChicago-FBIkeptstufftheresupposedly.jpg.36928612056cf7ee180721c0d72c9f99.jpg

 

1955501286_DOLANhasmicrofilmreproducedwithacopybacktowaldman.jpg.a1dcb15c6876ccfff95abf109abc7b8f.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/7/2023 at 11:19 AM, Michael Griffith said:

Now, of course, if one assumes that Oswald went straight to the post office before going to work, that would have put him at work at around 8:17, assuming he was first in line at the post office and that the money-order purchase only took two minutes. 17 minutes is still a significant timesheet fudge, and showing up 17 minutes late would likely have been noticed by someone at his work. 

Moreover, there is the thorny problem of how Oswald could have afforded to spend $21.45 on a mail-order rifle when he only had $16 to spend. In the seven weeks before he bought the money order for the rifle, he finished paying the $396 balance that he owed the State Department. State Department records show that his debt was cleared on March 9, three days before he bought the $21.45 money order ($205 in today's dollars, no small amount). But during those seven weeks, Oswald only made $490, and his rent alone was $68, leaving him only $16 to provide for his family (Anthony Summers, Not in Your Lifetime, pp. 193-194). So how could he have paid for a $21.45 money order with $16? How did he and his family eat and pay their other bills during those seven weeks?

$490 -( $396 + $68) = $26. 

Theoretically, he could have paid $21.45  and had $4.55 left. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 Mr. Joseph's comments above, supported by his detailed research prove his point in my humble opinion, which is honed by 44 years of legal experience.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, Ken Davies said:

$490 -( $396 + $68) = $26. 

Theoretically, he could have paid $21.45  and had $4.55 left. 

If he had anything at all to do with buying a rifle...  B)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, Ken Davies said:

 Mr. Joseph's comments above, supported by his detailed research prove his point in my humble opinion, which is honed by 44 years of legal experience.

Much appreciated Ken...  at some point certain things in this case have to move from theory to facts

Edited by David Josephs
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, David Josephs said:

The "Customer Invoice" copies are the property of FELDSOTT, not Klein's. Yet the FBI uses these to imply that KLEINS did get a shipment of these rifles in FEB 1963 and here, these are the slips.  

Simply: There never was a shipment of 100 rifles to KLEINS in FEB 1963 including C2766. Sorry if that's a shock.

Those slips had nothing whatsoever to do with KLEINS other than to justify the bogus FEB shipment which never occurred

Given the bizarre timeline of what happened in the first 48 hours, your theory that the entire Feb ‘63 Crescent to Klein’s shipment was fabricated is not totally impossible. However, there is zero evidence that the “customer’s invoice” set of slips came from Feldsott. Those slips were discovered and reported to the FBI by Waldman on the 23rd.

Feldsott’s “office copy” slips were first reported in his 11/27/63 302 report before the New York Field Office edited the s*** out of it on orders from FBI HQ. 

The originals of all the rifle documents from Klein’s and Crescent, including the two sets of slips, were collected by the FBI on orders from the WC in March. 

The point is that there are two sets of shipping slips that corroborate each other: one that says “customer’s invoice” from Waldman and one that says “office copy” from Feldsott. Period. There are legitimate reasons to be suspicious of some of things you mention, but a lot of the things you cite as evidence of forgery are either provably wrong or have alternate explanations with strong evidentiary support. 

The same goes for the microfilm. Long story short, it was originally left with Waldman, and Dolan went back to Klein’s to get it. What’s actually strange is that the first report says the microfilm was in a sealed envelope, and Dolan’s solo report says it was in a box. 

https://reopenkennedycase.forumotion.net/t2468-on-the-trail-of-the-klein-s-microfilm

Edited by Tom Gram
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...