Scott Kaiser

David Von Pein, on 29 Feb 2016 - 02:05 AM, said:

The money order ended up in the exact place it should have been -- at the Federal Records Center near Washington. The BOFD (Bank of First Deposit)--First National--sent it to the Federal Reserve Bank in Chicago. And then the FRB sent it to the Records Center in Washington for storage, whereupon (after 2 years) it is discarded. See CD75 below, where Lester Gohr of the FRB confirms where 75% of the PMOs were being sent after being handled by the FRB in Chicago as of March of 1963. Do you think this fellow named Gohr was lying too, Scott?....

http://www.maryferre...7#relPageId=673

Do you think this fellow named Gohr was lying too, Scott?....

Affirmative, absolutely and might I add a hell yes! An "assistance cashier" is going to say what he's told to say, he's an assistance, probably on training, now why didn't the WC question the Head Teller or branch manger?

This one is my personal favorite? Why? Because the FRB never lost the PMO in transit, the plotters knew it could never reach the postmaster.

After all, you have a copy of it don'tcha David?

Section 7080 -Other Procedural Matters

7080.10 -Postal Service Reimbursement to FRBs. The Postal Service has agreed to reimburse the FRBs for services provided in processing postal money orders beyond the level of service provided to financial institutions paying cash items. Charges will be determined by an annual survey, according to Federal Reserve and U.S. Postal Service agreements, and will be billed monthly with a single bill for each Federal Reserve District submitted to the Money Order Division, and will be paid at the end of each 6 months. The Postal Service reserves the right to review and challenge the method used in calculating these charges.

7080.20 -Replacement of Money Order Lost in Transit. When a money order is lost in transit, in place of submitting a photostatic copy, a PS Form 6401 "Domestic Money Order Inquiry", must be submitted (Appendix No. 1). The forms are available at all post offices. The money order serial number, amount, purchaser or payee, name and address to whom a replacement is to be issued, and the written signature of the person filing the request for replacement must be completed on the PS Form 6401. The remaining information should be provided, if available, to aid in the replacement process. If the original money order has been paid, a replacement cannot be issued. A photocopy of the paid item will be provided without cost to the FRB.

Section 7075 -Processing Domestic International Money Orders (Semi-Domestic)

Canadian money orders, ABA routing number 0000-0127, and Canal Zone money orders, ABA routing number 0000-0800, can be mechanically processed; all others must be processed manually. The batch size of Canadian money orders cannot exceed 200 documents. Money orders of different countries cannot be intermingled; each country must be batched separately. The total of all domestic-international money orders should be shown under code 400 on the PS Form 1901

And, how would we know it's a forgery? Well, for starters, had that PMO reached the postmaster, it would have been publicly declared a forgery which would have been devastating to those who created the forgery, certainly someone would have looked into it and possibly discovering where the forgery was created. Secondly, I took the liberty of printing that PMO and I took it to my post office yesterday, I needed to mail out some stuff, and I asked them if this PMO was legit, at first they said it looks as though it was, that was until the manger got involved in our discussion, probably over hearing my conversation, thank God the post office was a little slow when I walked in, and guess what he said? No dice!

What does this mean actually? That our friend Lee H. Oswald aka A. Hidell was set up....

And, how would we know it's a forgery? Well, for starters, had that PMO reached the postmaster, it would have been publicly declared a forgery which would have been devastating to those who created the forgery, certainly someone would have looked into it and possibly discovering where the forgery was created. Secondly, I took the liberty of printing that PMO and I took it to my post office yesterday, I needed to mail out some stuff, and I asked them if this PMO was legit, at first they said it looks as though it was, that was until the manger got involved in our discussion, probably over hearing my conversation, thank God the post office was a little slow when I walked in, and guess what he said? No dice!

I took the liberty to edit post #225 and highlight only the important information, by the way in-case you ask what FRB stands for, it's Federal Reserve Bank.

Just trying to help you out here David.

Yeah, I never would have figured that out -- even though I have been using that abbreviation for the last four months in these Edu. Forum threads, including three separate times in Post 224, which was before you ever wrote Post 225.

Okay, I'm not sure what that means, but I would like to take the time and apologize, for being wrong again, twice in a row, it happens like leap year, every four years, but here's where I was wrong. I said there were two "screw ups" from the bank right? Sadly, I was mistaken. When the bank didn't endorse the PMO and the Federal Reserve Bank, that's that phase you use FRB didn't endorse the PMO <----- means Postal Money Order, and the FRB did NOT send the PMO to the postmaster, well in a sense, that's a total of not one, not two, but three, that's (3) screw ups right?

I would like to know if I'm right David, please tell me if I'm wrong, that there wasn't (3) screw ups with the only PMO the FRB had in bulk knowing it was a forgery, am I right, waiting on something of real value, no excuses please.

I took the liberty to edit post #225 and highlight only the important information, by the way in-case you ask what FRB stands for, it's Federal Reserve Bank.

Just trying to help you out here David.

I've talked about Oswald's "cool and calm" demeanor many times in the past. Here's one such conversation I had with Bill Kelly at this forum in September 2013....

Truthfully, I believe you could talk about anyone's cool and calm demeanor, that doesn't make you them.

The money order ended up in the exact place it should have been -- at the Federal Records Center near Washington. The BOFD (Bank of First Deposit)--First National--sent it to the Federal Reserve Bank in Chicago. And then the FRB sent it to the Records Center in Washington for storage, whereupon (after 2 years) it is discarded. See CD75 below, where Lester Gohr of the FRB confirms where 75% of the PMOs were being sent after being handled by the FRB in Chicago as of March of 1963. Do you think this fellow named Gohr was lying too, Scott?....

Now, see, this is exactly what I don't understand, because, what I've learned that banks regulations for postal money orders when shipping is as follows, please correct me if I'm wrong David.

Shipping Money Orders. Instructions for shipping money orders to MOD are as follows.

• Place batches of money orders, including the USPS Batch Locator Control Documents in shipping boxes. Maintain the money orders and batches in the same sequence as they were read and listed on the paper tape list.
• Mail the original PS Form 1901 to:

Postal Data Center

Processing Control Division

Attn: Accounting Section

P.O. Box 14431

St. Louis, MO 63180

• Attach the last three copies of PS Form 1901, to the PS Form 1175 or machine equivalent and place all documents in the last box of money orders for that day.
• Place the paper tape list and the mutilated tapes in the same box.
• Batches of mutilated money orders may be included in the same box or in the same shipment as fit money orders, provided the batches of mutilated money orders are clearly identified as mutilated.
• Place a completed box label on the front of each box. The boxes should bear sequential numbers on the labels (e.g., "Box 2 of 4") to facilitate USPS processing.
• When justified by the number of boxes shipped, the boxes may be in the larger No. 5 box shipping carton.
• Place the boxes and cartons in mail pouches for delivery to the USPS representatives. Due to the limited space available on the pouch label, the mailing address on the label should read as follows:

St. Louis Missouri 63182

MOD P.O. Box 14963

From: F.R.B. (City)

Shipment will be made to the MOD by registered mail using pouches with rotary locks provided by the USPS.

7050 -Processing Mutilated Money Orders

This section relates to the handling of mutilated paper money orders with ABA routing numbers 0000-0020 or 000000204.

7050.10 -Mutilated paper money orders must be grouped in batches not to exceed 200 documents in a batch. If the total number of mutilated items does not exceed 200, they may be handled as one batch. For larger quantities, make as many batches as necessary, not exceeding 200 in any one batch.

7050.20 -Insert a USPS Batch Locator Control Document at the beginning of each batch of mutilated money orders.

7050.30 -Prepare an adding machine listing of each batch showing the following information:

• FRB name or code at the top.
• The amount of each item.
• The total amount of the batch.
• FRB clearance date.
• Batch number.

7050.40 -Batches of the paper money orders that cannot be machine processed without first being MICR amount encoded may be delivered to the USPS representative without processing, provided the above requirements are essentially met.

7050.50 - The total amount of mutilated items should be entered on the PS Form 1901, code 110.

Section 7060 - Detection Of Stolen Or Raised Money Orders

FRBs are not required to institute regular routing procedures for the detection of stolen or raised money orders. However, each FRB will cooperate, in special circumstances, to aid USPS representatives in the detection of these items.

Wouldn't you say that all PMOs are suppose to be returned to the Postmaster, and not the Federal Reserve, after all, a POM is a completely difference note isn't it?

David, peek-a-boo, where are you?

You have corrected me on the storefront window, and I thank you for that, I just couldn't get the imagine in my head through the interview, you then published the photos, and I was wrong, but, now that we've moved on from that, can we please address my other questions above, thank you David.

It's going to take two minutes to get up the stairs, but six seconds to kill Kennedy? Give me a break!

Reporter can you tell me the time it took you to get up the stairs from the time you entered the building?

Barker - Cough, cough, I believe it took a minute and a half to two minutes, that's an offal long time if you immediately ran up the stairs realizing the service elevator wasn't working but the Warren Commission did want you to reenact the whole two minutes right? I believe it took them no longer then 45 seconds to within a minute from the time Barker entered the TSBD to the time they realized the service elevators wasn't working after hearing the third shot go off is when they decided to immediately make a dash for the stairs which is next to the elevators, but why? Taking the elevator would have taken longer to get up in the building then taking the stairs, and any good cop is going to want to immediately get to the scene, so I ask again, how could Oswald hide the gun, run pass two women in the staircase, fly down four flights of stairs and beat Barker and Truly to the second floor?

No f****** way!

^Edited.

David, you actually believe what Baker said to the Warren Commission?

Of course. Why wouldn't I?

Do you think Baker is lying through his teeth in this 1964 CBS interview too, Ray? ....

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-ZRdbkNPuck

Reporter says, Oswald fired his rifle from the sixth floor of the TSBD building Yet a few minutes later possibly less then two minutes later, he was stopped by an armed policeman and identified by his own boss on the second floor on the other side of the building. I had always believed that Baker reached the second floor within 60 seconds, now which is it? Crikey!

Mr. Truly says, I ran in with him and just a matter of seconds: after the third shot, now you have to ask yourself, did Oswald really have enough time to travel from the sixth floor to the second when Truly and Barker ran from the first to the second? Wouldn't it seem to you that Oswald would have been showing some sign as being exhausted from running and not startled?

Barker says, we couldn't get the service elevator working so we turned around and immediately went up the stairs.

But Oswald looked startled not that Oswald looked suspicious, nervous, excited, adrenaline pumping but startled.

Shots are fired, Oswald is startled at the fact a policeman has just encountered him on the second floor, Oswald knows he has had connections to anti-Castro Cubans, and gone to jail in New Orleans, he knows he's been communicating with the FBI and CIA.

He realizes Kennedy has just been shot and now knows he's going to be set up, the rifle found at the sixth floor seems to have discrepancies about it, like the rest of the case. Oswald is asked, did you shoot the president, here is a man who had returned from Russia, expecting all kinds of TV stations to appear at the airport, but no one shows up, a man who supposedly went to Mexico seeking a Visa to head back to Russia after the assassination, with his wife, but there's no proof.

A man who is desperately seeking attention, but says, I'm just a pasty.

Why is so hard to believe Oswald was setup for an assassination he had nothing to do with?

Ray,

You actually have some doubts about whether Baker saw the real Lee Oswald in the lunchroom? Even with Roy Truly's verification?

Okaaaaaaaaaay.

Exactly my point, now can you please address the rest of what I've said?

David, thank you for clearing up the storefront appearance, I was trying to picture in my head how it looked according to Brewer's testimony. Now that that's cleared up. I don't believe there was a mistake by the bank regarding "bulk entries" as you have explained in your theory, and here's why, say the bank did have the postal money order but forgot to endorse it, the regulations are that the bank is required to forward the postal money order to the postmaster, which did not happened, so, in a sense that wasn't just one screw up, but two. The postmaster never received the PMO.

Secondly, whether Brewer followed Oswald to the theater , and or gave a description to the DPD of a nervous over exasperated suspicious man doesn't make him an assassin, what it does make him is someone who may think he's being set-up, why is that so hard to believe?

Thirdly, Marion Baker who discovers Oswald on the second floor of the TSBD doesn't notice anything odd about his accused actions, I would believe that just after killing the president when your adrenaline is at its peek would have certainly showed some signs then not two hours later. Of coarse your adrenaline is still running high, but this is two hours later, he's sweaty, nervous, scared that he's now set up, why is it so hard to believe that?

Lastly, I believe both sides have some strong arguing points, but I don't believe the lone assassin theory has a strong case, how can a high profile murder case have more screw ups then any case I know, why if the FBI had the lead on this case that it seemed as though the Dulles Commission and company took over? You have still yet to convince me that Oswald is the lone assassin other then producing a lot of hearsay and theories, kinda like that guy who's the author of Case Close, I can barely say his name, every time I hear him on TV the first thing he does is attack conspiracy theorist, well, I've read some wacky theories before, but what this guy doesn't do is attack someone who has some sensible knowledge, why? Because whatever this guy says is nothing more then hearsay and theories of his own, so he has to defend his book, which if you ask me, I think he's a total nut! Case closed.

David, thank you for clearing up the storefront appearance, I was trying to picture in my head how it looked according to Brewer's testimony. Now that that's cleared up. I don't believe there was a mistake by the bank regarding "bulk entries" as you have explained in your theory, and here's why, say the bank did have the postal money order but forgot to endorse it, the regulations are that the bank is required to forward the postal money order to the postmaster, which did not happened, so, in a sense that wasn't just one screw up, but two. The postmaster never received the PMO.

Secondly, whether Brewer followed Oswald to the theater , and or gave a description to the DPD of a nervous over exasperated suspicious man doesn't make him an assassin, what it does make him is someone who may think he's being set-up, why is that so hard to believe?

Thirdly, Marion Baker who discovers Oswald on the second floor of the TSBD doesn't notice anything odd about his accused actions, I would believe that just after killing the president when your adrenaline is at its peek would have certainly showed some signs then not two hours later. Of coarse your adrenaline is still running high, but this is two hours later, he's sweaty, nervous, scared that he's now set up, why is it so hard to believe that?

Lastly, I believe both sides have some strong arguing points, but I don't believe the lone assassin theory has a strong case, how can a high profile murder case have more screw ups then any case I know, why if the FBI had the lead on this case that it seemed as though the Dulles Commission and company took over? You have still yet to convince me that Oswald is the lone assassin other then producing a lot of hearsay and theories, kinda like that guy who's the author of Case Close, I can barely say his name, every time I hear him on TV the first thing he does is attack conspiracy theorist, well, I've read some wacky theories before, but what this guy doesn't do is attack someone who has some sensible knowledge, why? Because whatever this guy says is nothing more then hearsay and theories of his own, so he has to defend his book, which if you ask me, I think he's a total nut! Case closed.

Scott,

Brewer meant that Oswald came about 5 feet into the recessed area. But LHO never actually entered the store itself. The lobby area was several feet deep, as you can see in the video below (which includes yet another brief interview with Johnny Brewer)....

Why is the video edited just before it starts to pan towards the store? I was a painting contractor that did a number of retail stores, many stores like this one, and I am not sure where he gets his numbers from that this storefront door although recessed is not 15 ft from the sidewalk, and it's not as deep as you think, those store fronts are all built to code in-case of fire, there isn't one store any deeper then the other. Those recessed storefront doors are at the most seven feet from the sidewalk, in-fact the entire length of the storefront half wall window is seven ft in length from the outside corner to front door entrance, so if Oswald had been standing five ft. away from the front door at the storefront entrance he would have been standing closer to the sidewalk then the store. If true, at that angle from inside the store how could Brewer notice how he was acting all suspicious, this isn't making any sense.

Reporter - Johnny when was the first time you saw Lee Harvey Oswald?

Johnny - Ah, I saw him at Friday afternoon of November 22, he ah, walked into the Lobby of my store.

Reporter - How far in did he walk in there John for example?

Johnny - Ah just a few feet he was standing right where those tennis shoes are right there just about five feet from the door there

Reporter - What made you suspicious of this man who walked into the Lobby?

Johnny - Blah, blah, blah...

At no time did Mr. Brewer ever say he (Oswald) stood outside the front door, at no time did the reporter ask if Oswald was between the front door and the sidewalk, leading to believe he was standing on the exterior part of the store, at no time did Mr. Brewer suggest he was on the other side of the front door where you say Oswald stood.

And, where Oliver Stone has place him in his movie.

Now, he may call that part of the store the Lobby, but at no time does he say, Oswald stood in the Lobby on the exterior or on the other side of the front door. What he does say is everything Oswald is doing, is inside his store, and when anyone tells me, you're in the Lobby of my store I'm thinking, I'm standing inside the store, not outside. The outside is more consider a storefront entrance.

I understand the line of questioning when counsel asked about the U turn after Mr. Brewer made the statement, but what I'm still trying to understand, and if you can help me out here is this. When counsel asked Mr. BELIN - What you call this lobby, that is the area between the sidewalk and your front door, is that correct? that would be the outside area where I mention earlier and you point out, but Mr. Brewer says in his 1963 taped interview that this man came 5ft in and stood by the tennis shoes, am I also wrong in misunderstanding that too?

Mr. BELIN - When did he go in now? What did you hear at the time that he stepped into this lobby area?
Mr. BREWER - I heard the police cars coming up Jefferson, and he stepped in, and the police made a U-turn and went back down East Jefferson.
Mr. BELIN - Where did he make the U-turn? Not, where did the police make their U turn! Ugh!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I'm never understood!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Mr. BREWER - At Zangs.

Oh, I see where you're confused now, Scott. You think Brewer was talking about OSWALD when he refers to the "U-turn at Zangs". But Brewer was referring to the POLICE CAR making a "U-turn" there, not Oswald. ....

Mr. BREWER - I heard the police cars coming up Jefferson, and he stepped in, and the police made a U-turn and went back down East Jefferson.

Mr. BELIN - Where did he make the U-turn?

Mr. BREWER - At Zangs.

I think Paul is right when he said he doesn't understand me, I don't think anyone does.

Good night David.

Now, DVP[,] can you run this by me once more so I understand this[?] Oswald turned while he was still in the store staring at Brewer and didn't walk away until the police went by[,] is that correct[?] [O]r was it at Zangs that Oswald makes his turn and walks to the Texas Theater[?] [Y]ou see, that part always seems to get me.

Good Lord. What in the world are you talking about?

Why are you trying to micro-manage every split-second of Johnny Brewer's testimony? Johnny said he saw Oswald come into the recessed open-air "lobby" in front of his shoe store (LHO didn't actually ENTER the store itself; that's fairly obvious from Brewer's testimony), and Oswald stood there looking at the shoes and at one point was staring at Brewer through the window. And then, a few seconds later (not simultaneously while he was staring at Brewer), Oswald looked over his shoulder after the police cars had passed by. Oswald then walked up toward the theater, and Brewer left his store and followed him.

Now, a much more important question is the one that follows for Scott R. Kaiser....

Why on Earth did anyone need to explain all of that to you?

~DVP patented shrug~

No, that's not what John said, what John said was Oswald came in my Lobby about 5ft and stood by the tennis shoes, but then when he was questioned about the shape of the front store windows he was asked if the front of his store looked like "V" or made a type of "U" shape? Yes, sir, now for me to understand this the from the exterior side of the door which is further in from the two side widows was 15ft away from the sidewalk, that would have meant Oswald was standing right near the exterior side of the door, but Johnny says Oswald was inside standing by the tennis shoes and was about 10ft away from him if Oswald was 5ft in the store, John said his store was about 20ft wide, so at what point does Oswald make his turn at Zangs which Brewer said he did if Oswald is in his store?

If Mrs. Postal wasn't around to see Oswald enter the theater[,] how would she know he was running from them?

She derived that information from Johnny Brewer, of course.

Again, this is blatantly obvious to anyone even halfway familiar with the Kennedy case.

Moved my post.

In Postal's testimony to the Warren Commission she says "This man is running from them for some reason" I have a few questions, if Mrs Postal wasn't around to see Oswald enter the theater how would she know he was running from them? If the counter clerk in the theater didn't see Oswald, and Mrs. Postal didn't see Oswald, and the only one who thought of anything suspicious was Brewer who informed Mrs. Postal about Oswald entering into the theater how do you suppose the phone call to the police panned out? Um, officer, I think the man who;'s running away from you for some reason is in my theater you may want to send the entire police station down here to check it out. In the mean while the police were driving up and down the streets looking for someone, but because this guy sneaks into the theater who could have been anyone, the entire police department elects to stop their search to check it out? It just doesn't make any sense to me

Good job, Chuck.

I think DVP meant that sarcastically, however, I'm not to sure about DVP. At times, it appears he's coming out from the dark side, he once called me Luke.

I'm still waiting on an answer as to how Oswald managed to look over his shoulder when all that time in Brewer's store Oswald according to Brewer "was staring at me." It appears the over the shoulder look didn't happen until the police officers made a U turn, but I almost forgot, by that time Oswald had also turned and walked towards the Texas Theater once owned by Howard Hughes.

Now, DVP can you run this by me once more so I understand this, Oswald turned while he was still in the store staring at Brewer and didn't walk away until the police went by is that correct, or was it at Zangs that Oswald makes his turn and walks to the Texas Theater, you see, that part always seems to get me.

Thanks for plugging me in at your site, I feel this overwhelming honor...