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

[Gil Jesus]

It was charged from another Chicago Bank

http://i56.tinypic.com/2zxsbb9.jpg

[David G. Healy]

It was charged from another Chicago Bank

http://i56.tinypic.com/2zxsbb9.jpg

my goodness, things aren't looking so good for our lone nut/SBT/LHO-did-it-all-by-his-lonesome crowd, is it?

[David Von Pein]

.........

Edited March 1, 2011 by David Von Pein

[David Von Pein]

William Waldman of Klein's admitted forthrightly that he could not "specifically say when this money order was deposited". Quoting from Waldman's WC testimony:

Mr. WALDMAN. Now, we cannot specifically say when this money order was deposited, but on our deposit of March 13, 1963, we show an item of $21.45, as indicated on the Xerox copy of our deposit slip marked, or identified by--as Waldman Deposition Exhibit No. 10.

Mr. BELIN. And I have just marked as a document what you are reading from, which appears to be a deposit with the First National Bank of Chicago by your company; is that correct?

Mr. WALDMAN. That's correct.

Mr. BELIN. And on that deposit, one of the items is $21.45, out of a total deposit that day of $13,827.98; is that correct?

Mr. WALDMAN. That's correct.

----------------------

But regardless of WHEN exactly Oswald's $21.45 money order was deposited by Klein's into their First National Bank account, it definitely WAS deposited, without doubt, unless the CTers want to believe that the stamped "Klein's Sporting Goods, Inc." endorsement on the back of the money order is phony and was merely stamped on there at a later date after the assassination, which is pure guesswork and (very silly) speculation.

Such sheer speculation is not too silly for conspiracy theorists like James DiEugenio, of course, because Jimbo thinks the whole money order itself is phony, right down to Lee Oswald's VERIFIED HANDWRITING on the "phony" money order.

William Waldman even stamped a WC exhibit (Waldman Exhibit No. 9) with the Klein's stamp/endorsement, and it matches perfectly with the stamp seen on the back of CE788 (Oswald's money order):

Edited March 1, 2011 by David Von Pein

[Gil Jesus]

William Waldman of Klein's admitted forthrightly that he could not "specifically say when this money order was deposited". Quoting from Waldman's WC testimony:

Mr. WALDMAN. Now, we cannot specifically say when this money order was deposited, but on our deposit of March 13, 1963, we show an item of $21.45, as indicated on the Xerox copy of our deposit slip marked, or identified by--as Waldman Deposition Exhibit No. 10.

Mr. BELIN. And I have just marked as a document what you are reading from, which appears to be a deposit with the First National Bank of Chicago by your company; is that correct?

Mr. WALDMAN. That's correct.

Mr. BELIN. And on that deposit, one of the items is $21.45, out of a total deposit that day of $13,827.98; is that correct?

Mr. WALDMAN. That's correct.

----------------------

But regardless of WHEN exactly Oswald's $21.45 money order was deposited by Klein's into their First National Bank account, it definitely WAS deposited, without doubt, unless the CTers want to believe that the stamped "Klein's Sporting Goods, Inc." endorsement on the back of the money order is phony and was merely stamped on there at a later date after the assassination, which is pure guesswork and (very silly) speculation.

Such sheer speculation is not too silly for conspiracy theorists like James DiEugenio, of course, because Jimbo thinks the whole money order itself is phony, right down to Lee Oswald's VERIFIED HANDWRITING on the "phony" money order.

William Waldman even stamped a WC exhibit (Waldman Exhibit No. 9) with the Klein's stamp/endorsement, and it matches perfectly with the stamp seen on the back of CE788 (Oswald's money order):

THE MONEY ORDER CONTAINED NO STAMP ON IT FROM ANY FINANCIAL INSTITUTION. THE ONLY STAMP ON IT WAS KLEIN'S OWN STAMP FOR DEPOSIT.

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

Mr. BELIN. I hand you what has been marked as Commission Exhibit No. 788, which appears to be a U.S. postal money order payable to the order of Klein's Sporting Goods.....And on the reverse side there appears to be an endorsement of a bank. I wonder if you would read that endorsement, if you would, and examine it, please.

Mr. WALDMAN. This is a stamped endorsement reading "Pay to the order of the First National Bank of Chicago," followed by our account No. 50 space 91144, and that, in turn, followed by "Klein's Sporting Goods, Inc."

Mr. BELIN. Do you know whether or not that is your company's endorsement on that money order?

Mr. WALDMAN. It's identical to our endorsement.

Mr. BELIN. And I hand you what has been marked as Waldman Deposition Exhibit No. 9 and ask you if you can state what this is.

Mr. WALDMAN. This is our endorsement stamp which reads the same as that shown on the money order in question.

Mr. BELIN. You have just now stamped Waldman Deposition Exhibit No. 9 with your endorsement stamp?

Mr. WALDMAN. Correct.

( 7 H 367 )

http://i53.tinypic.com/15oieq1.jpg

The only endorsement on that money order was the stamp of Klein's Sporting Goods. The money order was never paid by any financial institution.

[Gil Jesus]

Nice work Gil.

in all the work I have done on this issue, I beleive that the FBI was never able to link the money order to any specific Klein's deposit.

Had the money order been processed by the First National Bank of Chicago, the bank would have put its DATED stamp on it. Financial institutions stamp checks and money orders in order to ensure that each institution pays only once on each item. Without the stamp, there's no proof that the money was actually paid by the bank and credited to the customer's account. The stamps also assist law enforcement in tracking finances in criminal cases. This money order should have on it the DATED stamps of all financial institutions that handled the document.

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

[Gil Jesus]

William Waldman of Klein's admitted forthrightly that he could not "specifically say when this money order was deposited". Quoting from Waldman's WC testimony:

Mr. WALDMAN. Now, we cannot specifically say when this money order was deposited, but on our deposit of March 13, 1963, we show an item of $21.45, as indicated on the Xerox copy of our deposit slip marked, or identified by--as Waldman Deposition Exhibit No. 10.

Mr. BELIN. And I have just marked as a document what you are reading from, which appears to be a deposit with the First National Bank of Chicago by your company; is that correct?

Mr. WALDMAN. That's correct.

Mr. BELIN. And on that deposit, one of the items is $21.45, out of a total deposit that day of $13,827.98; is that correct?

Mr. WALDMAN. That's correct.

----------------------

But regardless of WHEN exactly Oswald's $21.45 money order was deposited by Klein's into their First National Bank account, it definitely WAS deposited, without doubt, unless the CTers want to believe that the stamped "Klein's Sporting Goods, Inc." endorsement on the back of the money order is phony and was merely stamped on there at a later date after the assassination, which is pure guesswork and (very silly) speculation.

Such sheer speculation is not too silly for conspiracy theorists like James DiEugenio, of course, because Jimbo thinks the whole money order itself is phony, right down to Lee Oswald's VERIFIED HANDWRITING on the "phony" money order.

William Waldman even stamped a WC exhibit (Waldman Exhibit No. 9) with the Klein's stamp/endorsement, and it matches perfectly with the stamp seen on the back of CE788 (Oswald's money order):

THE MONEY ORDER CONTAINED NO STAMP ON IT FROM ANY FINANCIAL INSTITUTION. THE ONLY STAMP ON IT WAS KLEIN'S OWN STAMP FOR DEPOSIT.

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

Mr. BELIN. I hand you what has been marked as Commission Exhibit No. 788, which appears to be a U.S. postal money order payable to the order of Klein's Sporting Goods.....And on the reverse side there appears to be an endorsement of a bank. I wonder if you would read that endorsement, if you would, and examine it, please.

Mr. WALDMAN. This is a stamped endorsement reading "Pay to the order of the First National Bank of Chicago," followed by our account No. 50 space 91144, and that, in turn, followed by "Klein's Sporting Goods, Inc."

Mr. BELIN. Do you know whether or not that is your company's endorsement on that money order?

Mr. WALDMAN. It's identical to our endorsement.

Mr. BELIN. And I hand you what has been marked as Waldman Deposition Exhibit No. 9 and ask you if you can state what this is.

Mr. WALDMAN. This is our endorsement stamp which reads the same as that shown on the money order in question.

Mr. BELIN. You have just now stamped Waldman Deposition Exhibit No. 9 with your endorsement stamp?

Mr. WALDMAN. Correct.

( 7 H 367 )

http://i53.tinypic.com/15oieq1.jpg

The only endorsement on that money order was the stamp of Klein's Sporting Goods. The money order was never paid by any financial institution.

Commission Document 7 indicates that the $ 21.45 entry on Waldman 10 was an American Express Money Order and NOT a postal money order.

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

[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?

[David Josephs]

The question was, "Do you know whether or not this is YOUR COMPANY'S endorsement"

The "It's identical to our endorsement" answer sounds too much like a non-answer answer. It may indeed be almost identical but whether it was his comapny's stamp is another question entirely.

Anyway... I started to look more closely at the two stamp samples we have - your assumption being that this was created after the fact.

Seems to me that while close, they are not identical and whether that is simply stamp wear or what, I thought you might like to take a look.

I imagine creating a stamp is no big deal but why there are such differences in many of the letters, especially the KLEIN'S lettering and the apostrophe is not even close at all... The one Waldman uses on Ex.9 looks newer and cleaner that the older one on the back of the Money Order - single use versus multiple possibly - yet there are difference.... like the tilt of the N in the bottom stamp as opposed to the "I".

DJ

[Dean Hagerman]

Seems to me that while close, they are not identical and whether that is simply stamp wear or what, I thought you might like to take a look.

I imagine creating a stamp is no big deal but why there are such differences in many of the letters, especially the KLEIN'S lettering and the apostrophe is not even close at all... The one Waldman uses on Ex.9 looks newer and cleaner that the older one on the back of the Money Order - single use versus multiple possibly - yet there are difference.... like the tilt of the N in the bottom stamp as opposed to the "I".

DJ

Great point David!

[Jack White]

John Armstrong has documented all of this in H&L.

Jack

[David G. Healy]

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!

[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!

What statement have I made Dave? Having problems reading these days?

[David Josephs]

I am afraid that I have to agree with Craig here Gil....

What I understand you saying is that the First Bank of Chicago would have put their mark on the back, and they didn't.

It would be very helpful to see what a correctly deposited check/MO/anything looks like to compare.

DJ

[Gil Jesus]

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.