Klein's $ 21.45 deposit of 3/13/63 was NOT "Hidell" money order

[Craig Lamson]

The fact that it doesn't is proof that payment was never made to Klein's account.

Can you show us examples of other USPS money orders processed that day to back up your statement above?

reasonable doubt written all over this one Craigster -- Can you show us examples of other USPS money orders processed that day to back up WCR exihibit-statement, your move!

Yah Dave, that's a pretty weak argument from that guy. To suggest that USPS money orders processed on THAT DAY didn't need a bank endorsement or tracking stamp for payment...this is SOP for paying instruments of utterance, such as checks and money orders. Doesn't matter what day, what US bank or what type of document it is. They're all stamped "Paid" when paid.

Not even Von Pein would try to suggest that.

I'm just asking for you to prove what you say is true. Pretty simple don't you think?

Edited March 2, 2011 by Craig Lamson

[David Josephs]

The fact that it doesn't is proof that payment was never made to Klein's account.

Can you show us examples of other USPS money orders processed that day to back up your statement above?

reasonable doubt written all over this one Craigster -- Can you show us examples of other USPS money orders processed that day to back up WCR exihibit-statement, your move!

Yah Dave, that's a pretty weak argument from that guy. To suggest that USPS money orders processed on THAT DAY didn't need a bank endorsement or tracking stamp for payment...this is SOP for paying instruments of utterance, such as checks and money orders. Doesn't matter what day, what US bank or what type of document it is. They're all stamped "Paid" when paid.

Not even Von Pein would try to suggest that.

Gil...

While a suggestion is one thing... proof is another. Do you or do you not have an example of what the 1st Bank of Chicago put on the backs of the checks and Money Orders they processed for ANY day that month? Any day at all?

Not disagreeing with your logic... there SHOULD be something there... but are you sure and why?

[David Josephs]

Dont have the book handy Jim...

Is it a memo of the process or a picture of the back of a properly cleared money order... maybe even from the same deposit?

[Craig Lamson]

Its a memo on the process.

The imprint that GIl quotes, "Pay to the Order of The First National Bank of Chicago,50-91144, Klein's Sporting Goods", this was made with a rubber stamp.

Further,Robert Wilmouth, an officer of that bank then outlined the path a check or money order would take through the Federal Reserve system.

Well, this particular money order has none of the stamps that Wilmouth mentioned on it Further, it was not even stamped by his own bank. All it has on it is the rubber stamp imprint.

Now if you go to Oswald's checks from say Leslie's Welding Co., at CE 1173, you will see all the stamps on the back side proving it went through the system. Same with JCS checks at CE 1174. Same with Reilly Coffee Company and Texas State checks from what I think are unemployment benefits. (CE 1157) These were all cashed by Oswald into banks and went through the system.

But not the Klein's Money Order.

In addition to the fact that it was an AmEx money order, that deposit was under the category of Items from other Chicago Banks--which it was not. Am I right on that Gil? Klein's divided up the deposits into four categories and that was one of them.

So in other words you nor Gil can offer us a simple image of what a processed money order should look like. Fair enough. All we have is handwaving.

[Craig Lamson]

I think the point is that with Oswald' s other money orders, such was not the case. I mean you did see the other stamps indicating it went through the system.

I really think that so much good work has been done on this issue by at least four people--Gil, Evica, Purvis, and Armstrong--that I believe this is now an issue the other side has to defend against. That is, the weight of the evidence says that Oswald never picked up that particular rifle, or ordered it.

What Craig is up in arms about is this: it blows any HSCA, FBI, Farid, or Lamson analysis of those phony BYP to hell. But in my view, the analysis was already blown by the classified internal report by David Eisendrath that said the HSCA could not discern a phony photograph if they knew even in advance it was phony. Blakey was really smart to keep that one under wraps.

But this rifle analysis is even more important in my opinion. As time goes on, we see that if anything, the first generation of critics were simply too trusting. Not even they understand just how bad the FBI and the WC really were.

One last point, if Oswald never picked up that rifle, how did it get into evidence? And why would he need a bag the size of that one in evidence today.

I'm not up in arms about anything. It appears those who are now all worked up are those being asked for graphic proof to support the claims they are making.

If the backyard photos for example are fake, simply show us graphic proof af that. If the Money order is missing routing stamps you claim must be there, show us graphic proof of that.

Proof...what an interesting concept....

[Gil Jesus]

Its a memo on the process.

The imprint that GIl quotes, "Pay to the Order of The First National Bank of Chicago,50-91144, Klein's Sporting Goods", this was made with a rubber stamp.

Further,Robert Wilmouth, an officer of that bank then outlined the path a check or money order would take through the Federal Reserve system.

Well, this particular money order has none of the stamps that Wilmouth mentioned on it Further, it was not even stamped by his own bank. All it has on it is the rubber stamp imprint.

Now if you go to Oswald's checks from say Leslie's Welding Co., at CE 1173, you will see all the stamps on the back side proving it went through the system. Same with JCS checks at CE 1174. Same with Reilly Coffee Company and Texas State checks from what I think are unemployment benefits. (CE 1157) These were all cashed by Oswald into banks and went through the system.

But not the Klein's Money Order.

In addition to the fact that it was an AmEx money order, that deposit was under the category of Items from other Chicago Banks--which it was not. Am I right on that Gil? Klein's divided up the deposits into four categories and that was one of them.

That's true. There were actually TWO deposits of $ 21.45 in Waldman Exhibit 10 ( 21 H 706 & another on 21 H 707 )and both of them were listed under "Checks on other Chicago Banks".

The first one was a part of a deposit totalling $ 13,827.98

http://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh21/html/WH_Vol21_0365b.htm

The second one was part of a deposit totalling $ 2,116.91

http://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh21/html/WH_Vol21_0366a.htm

In Commission Document 7, pg. 192, Robert K. Wilmouth, VP of the 1st National Bank of Chicago, told the FBI that the first deposit was an American Express money order, NOT the postal money order sent by "A.Hidell". He knew this because the bank handled money orders differently. They sent the AmEx money orders directly to American Express in New York City. They sent the Postal money orders to the Federal Reserve bank in Chicago, which in turn sent them to a central processing center in Kansas City, Missouri. He also said that the second $ 21.45 money order WAS a postal money order and that that one was sent on to the Fed bank in Chicago.

BTW, after the assassination, Postal inspectors searched for the "Hidell" money order in Kansas City and never found it. It wasn't there.

Wilmouth was specific in his identification of the AmEx money order. He said that it was on a tape between deposits of $ 15.03 and $ 14.36, precisely the deposit that the WC said was the postal money order sent by "A.Hidell".

http://i52.tinypic.com/xm1n35.jpg

Of course, you doubters will doubt no matter how much evidence I produce. For example, I could direct you to the 8 money orders Oswald used to pay back his State Dept. loan and the stamps on those, but you'd only argue that it was a different date or a different bank , or some other nonsense.

Not only did the Warren Commission not produce another non-stamped money order to prove that this was the way they were handled, it never called Robert Wilmouth to testify and identify the "Hidell" money order as having passed through his bank ? Why ? BECAUSE IT DIDN'T !!!

The purpose of bank endorsements and date stamps is to ensure that each item ( check or money order in those days ) is paid only once by each financial institution. The bank stamps allow an item to be tracked as it is routed through the banking system. If an item lacks a bank endorsement, it simply means that an item was never deposited or cashed at a financial institution.

This is not debatable, THIS IS FACT.

And it's also FACT that this money order had NO STAMP from the First National Bank of Chicago, it had NO STAMP from the Fedreal Reserve Bank in Chicago, and it had NO STAMP from the Federal Postal Money Order Center in Kansas City.

Absent the required stamps of the financial institutions through which this money order was ALLEGED to have passed, THERE IS NO EVIDENCE THAT THIS MONEY ORDER WAS EVER PROCESSED BY ANY FINANCIAL INSTITUTION.

And for those of you who can't see the obvious, I feel sorry for you.

[David Von Pein]

I wonder how the evil conspirators got Oswald to put his writing on a "fake" money order? Was Lee trying to frame HIMSELF?

[Pat Speer]

Its a memo on the process.

The imprint that GIl quotes, "Pay to the Order of The First National Bank of Chicago,50-91144, Klein's Sporting Goods", this was made with a rubber stamp.

Further,Robert Wilmouth, an officer of that bank then outlined the path a check or money order would take through the Federal Reserve system.

Well, this particular money order has none of the stamps that Wilmouth mentioned on it Further, it was not even stamped by his own bank. All it has on it is the rubber stamp imprint.

Now if you go to Oswald's checks from say Leslie's Welding Co., at CE 1173, you will see all the stamps on the back side proving it went through the system. Same with JCS checks at CE 1174. Same with Reilly Coffee Company and Texas State checks from what I think are unemployment benefits. (CE 1157) These were all cashed by Oswald into banks and went through the system.

But not the Klein's Money Order.

In addition to the fact that it was an AmEx money order, that deposit was under the category of Items from other Chicago Banks--which it was not. Am I right on that Gil? Klein's divided up the deposits into four categories and that was one of them.

That's true. There were actually TWO deposits of $ 21.45 in Waldman Exhibit 10 ( 21 H 706 & another on 21 H 707 )and both of them were listed under "Checks on other Chicago Banks".

The first one was a part of a deposit totalling $ 13,827.98

http://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh21/html/WH_Vol21_0365b.htm

The second one was part of a deposit totalling $ 2,116.91

http://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh21/html/WH_Vol21_0366a.htm

In Commission Document 7, pg. 192, Robert K. Wilmouth, VP of the 1st National Bank of Chicago, told the FBI that the first deposit was an American Express money order, NOT the postal money order sent by "A.Hidell". He knew this because the bank handled money orders differently. They sent the AmEx money orders directly to American Express in New York City. They sent the Postal money orders to the Federal Reserve bank in Chicago, which in turn sent them to a central processing center in Kansas City, Missouri. He also said that the second $ 21.45 money order WAS a postal money order and that that one was sent on to the Fed bank in Chicago.

BTW, after the assassination, Postal inspectors searched for the "Hidell" money order in Kansas City and never found it. It wasn't there.

Wilmouth was specific in his identification of the AmEx money order. He said that it was on a tape between deposits of $ 15.03 and $ 14.36, precisely the deposit that the WC said was the postal money order sent by "A.Hidell".

http://i52.tinypic.com/xm1n35.jpg

Of course, you doubters will doubt no matter how much evidence I produce. For example, I could direct you to the 8 money orders Oswald used to pay back his State Dept. loan and the stamps on those, but you'd only argue that it was a different date or a different bank , or some other nonsense.

Not only did the Warren Commission not produce another non-stamped money order to prove that this was the way they were handled, it never called Robert Wilmouth to testify and identify the "Hidell" money order as having passed through his bank ? Why ? BECAUSE IT DIDN'T !!!

The purpose of bank endorsements and date stamps is to ensure that each item ( check or money order in those days ) is paid only once by each financial institution. The bank stamps allow an item to be tracked as it is routed through the banking system. If an item lacks a bank endorsement, it simply means that an item was never deposited or cashed at a financial institution.

This is not debatable, THIS IS FACT.

And it's also FACT that this money order had NO STAMP from the First National Bank of Chicago, it had NO STAMP from the Fedreal Reserve Bank in Chicago, and it had NO STAMP from the Federal Postal Money Order Center in Kansas City.

Absent the required stamps of the financial institutions through which this money order was ALLEGED to have passed, THERE IS NO EVIDENCE THAT THIS MONEY ORDER WAS EVER PROCESSED BY ANY FINANCIAL INSTITUTION.

And for those of you who can't see the obvious, I feel sorry for you.

Not to take a side on this particular issue, as I haven't researched it enough to say one way or the other, but those doubting the FBI could or would fake documents need to read up on the history of the FBI. In some of the books on the FBI it is acknowledged they had a whole department devoted to it. Now, as I recall, this department was not supposed to create fake documents to use against American citizens. As I recall, this department--an extension of the questioned documents department--was supposed to work with the CIA in creating fake documents damaging to KGB officers and foreign officials, so that they could be used against them and potentially turn them to our side.

I recall in particular reading that the FBI had forgers on their payroll. So... while I certainly think it's possible Oswald did buy the rifle--it certainly appears he owned some kind of rifle--it also seems possible the paperwork tying him to the rifle was phonied up by the FBI, with the cooperation of Klein's.

Edited March 2, 2011 by Pat Speer

[Karl Kinaski]

I wonder how the evil conspirators got Oswald to put his writing on a "fake" money order? Was Lee trying to frame HIMSELF?

Which Oswald do you mean? Lee or Harvey? The NOLA Bolton Ford Oswald, the Odio-Incident-Oswald, or the Dallas shooting range Oswald? The Mexico-City Oswald, or the Dallas Lincoln-Mercury Oswald? The LN tale is like the unsinkable sinking Titanic...

KK

[Gil Jesus]

Not to take a side on this particular issue, as I haven't researched it enough to say one way or the other, but those doubting the FBI could or would fake documents need to read up on the history of the FBI. In some of the books on the FBI it is acknowledged they had a whole department devoted to it. Now, as I recall, this department was not supposed to create fake documents to use against American citizens. As I recall, this department--an extension of the questioned documents department--was supposed to work with the CIA in creating fake documents damaging to KGB officers and foreign officials, so that they could be used against them and potentially turn them to our side.

I recall in particular reading that the FBI had forgers on their payroll. So... while I certainly think it's possible Oswald did buy the rifle--it certainly appears he owned some kind of rifle--it also seems possible the paperwork tying him to the rifle was phonied up by the FBI, with the cooperation of Klein's.

Pat, there are so many problems wwith this money order, it's not even funny. Why on earth the WC didn't call the person who stamped "Klein's" on it to testify is beyond me. Instead, they heard from a VP of the Company, William Waldman, who didn't know his butt from a hole in the wall. I don't find it beyond reason that the FBI could have taken the Klein's stamp to "examine it" and stamp the money order on the back while they had it. Here are some of the problems with this money order:

1. The number of the money order was out of sequence for the Dallas PO.

2. The MO contained no stamp from the First National Bank of Chicago

3. The MO contained no stamp from the Federal Reserve Bank in Chicago.

4. The MO contained no stamp from the Federal Postal Money Order Center in Kansas City.

5. There were TWO $ 21.45 entries in Klein's deposit of 3/13/63 and the one the WC said was a postal money order sent by "A.Hidell" was an American Express Money Order.( CD 7, pg. 192 )

6. No Dallas Postal employee was ever named as the one who found the "stub" of the sale to "Hidell".

7. No record of the MO was found after the assassination in Kansas City.

8. The Dallas stamp of "Mar 12, 63" could have been stamped on it after the assassination.

Thanks for the info on the forgers on the FBI payroll. That's something I was not aware of.

[David Josephs]

Gil -

Given the tap dance around an actual photograph of an actual money order deposited either in the same deposit or one occuring in that timeframe from Kleins... All we have is what YOU SAY they were supposed to do.

How many other MOs were not stamped yet deposited that day, that week?

Is it really that hard to find? You seem to be able to find just about everything related to this MO, and I for one thank you, but please...

1. The number of the money order was out of sequence for the Dallas PO. please illustrate

2. The MO contained no stamp from the First National Bank of Chicago

3. The MO contained no stamp from the Federal Reserve Bank in Chicago.

4. The MO contained no stamp from the Federal Postal Money Order Center in Kansas City. So obviously all the other checks and MOs deposited by Klein's on 3/13/63 did have these stamps... right? please illustrate

I am NOT disbelieving you Gil - it makes all the sense in the world that the Oswlad MO should have these things... and don't.

and you are right, producing a money order with these stamps originating from another bank will help, but is not the same as Kleins' process... do we not have a single deposit from Kleins that can support your assertion?

if you can't produce for us the result of SOP for deposits at Kleins it is very possible that none of the deposited paperwork has these stamps - which in turn would take us in yet another direction... If the stamps were indeed on any of the other paperwork we can understand why the WC or FBI don't include any of them for comparison...

Finally - and please excuse me if you covered this, where was the money order found?

Edited March 2, 2011 by David Josephs

[Craig Lamson]

The evidence says that this money order never went through the system. In fact, if you couple that with the fact that no one could ever find it in the contemporaneous deposit record, well to me its pretty obvious as to why not.

Please show us the graphic evidence that proves the money order was missing stamps, which you say proves it did not go through the system.

[David Josephs]

Jim...

As I wrote, I am not questioning the conclusion that the MO was not deposited.. I am simply a little surprised that we cannot produce an image of a correctly deposited and cashed item from Kleins thru the banking system FROM THAT DEPOSIT or any deposit for that matter.

Not a soft shoe but a tap dance... and of course I was being light hearted... and I DO take his and your word on the process.

But we do not have these other checks for one of two reasons

1) the other checks have the stamps you are talking about and would make the Oswald MO look ridiculous

2) the other checks DO NOT have the stamp... or some of them do not and some do... and that makes it less suspicious

either way it would be good to know.

The overlapping DALLAS PO Stamp in the bottom right corner is also a bit puzzling... How does that stamp make its way onto this MO and is it on top of or underneath Oswald's MO stamp... I'll get back to you.

Edited March 3, 2011 by David Josephs

[Gil Jesus]

The evidence says that this money order never went through the system. In fact, if you couple that with the fact that no one could ever find it in the contemporaneous deposit record, well to me its pretty obvious as to why not.

Please show us the graphic evidence that proves the money order was missing stamps, which you say proves it did not go through the system.

I find it hard to believe that a man your age doesn't know how money orders are handled.

[Gil Jesus]

David:

I hope your above post was meant to be a piece of offbeat black comedy, which I am not quite getting. Because I find it hard to follow in its illogic. Especially because everything GIl and I have named as evidence has been footnoted and you can look it up yourself.

All the checks Oswald cashed contained all the stamps they should have as they went through the system. If you don't believe it, look for yourself.

RObert Wilmouth was the VP of the Bank of Chicago, which was Klein's banker. He quoted the routing system the checks took and from there, we can tell which stamps would be on each check or money order. Question: Why would he detail this unless the FBI wanted to know?

Back in the olden days, banks used to return your original checks to you. I am old enough to recall that-you probably are not. Each of my checks had the bank stamp on it.

Now, if you look at the money order in evidence, which you apparently have not, it does not even have the bank stamp on it. It only has Klein's rubber stamp. Now, why is that so odd? Because there are notations on the money order indicating that the FBI retrieved it on November 23rd? DOn't you think 8 months is long enough for a money order to be deposited?

Because Gil does not have the other deposits made that day, how does this mean he is doing a "soft shoe"? Why should those checks be in the WC? In fact, if I was Allen Dulles or McCloy or Ford, I would have requested they not be there.

The evidence says that this money order never went through the system. In fact, if you couple that with the fact that no one could ever find it in the contemporaneous deposit record, well to me its pretty obvious as to why not.

The proof that bank stamps were used on postal money orders is right on the back of the money order itself:

"More than one endorsement is prohibited by law. BANK STAMPS are not regarded as endorsements."

http://i56.tinypic.com/20aqrl2.jpg

In 1963, postal money orders were stamped by banks.

Edited March 4, 2011 by Gil Jesus