Yet another Harvey & Lee factoid that doesn't withstand scrutiny?

[Cliff Varnell]

On 8/20/2019 at 2:50 PM, David Von Pein said:

And after listening to your One Trick Pony act for many unbearable years, the only proper response to your non-stop barrage of Clothing Crap® is  ----->  .

 

In any legitimate murder investigation the physical evidence found with the body is the sun around which all the other evidence revolves.

Not so the JFKA.  All LNers find the clothing evidence "unbearable" -- a legion of Critical Master Class Big Name Researchers find the extant physical evidence "boring."

Two sides of the same "False Mystery" coin.

[Lawrence Schnapf]

On 8/16/2019 at 3:34 PM, David Von Pein said:

http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2012/08/The Postmark On Commission Exhibit 773

 

http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2015/10/The "Hidell" Money Order  <----- (Warning: Pack a lunch [and maybe dinner too] if you want to read this whole webpage.)

thanks. Query- does it really make sense that Klein's would microfilm envelopes of orders? i can see microfilming the money order but why waste microfilm on envelopes. seems expensive i 1963. i wonder how many companies actually took images of envelopes.....

[Lawrence Schnapf]

On 8/16/2019 at 3:15 PM, Lance Payette said:

I will cheerfully plead Total Ignorance but will look into the franking mark.  I dived into the "postal money order mystery" to the point of challenging my sanity.  I was the one who discovered that the number across the top of the Klein's money order is a File Locator Number which shows that the money order was fully processed through the Federal Reserve System and, at the end of that processing, was placed by the Treasury Department in the Federal Records Center for the requisite retention period (in case there were a controversy and the Postal Service needed the original money order for evidentiary purposes).  The File Locator Number was a relatively recent innovation that allowed a money order to be quickly retrieved (as the Klein's money order was).

The File Locator Number really put the "postal money order mystery" to bed insofar as I was concerned, but of course not insofar as my opponents were concerned.  Thus, I beat the living hell out of the secondary issue as to whether the postal money order "should" have had endorsements on the back.  I produced what I thought was an informed and logical explanation as to why a postal order that was deposited for payment with a Federal Reserve member bank, sent to a Federal Reserve regional bank and then to the Treasury Department as agent for the Postal Service - as this one was - would not have endorsements on the back (i.e., because it had never been outside the Federal Reserve system, with the Federal Reserve having contracted to act as collection and payment agent for the Postal Service).  This would be in contrast to one that was deposited with a non-member bank and sent to a clearinghouse bank before it entered the Federal Reserve system.

But despite many hours of trying I could never get a definitive answer from documents or attempted contacts.  I bowed out of the matter when Sandy decided he was a de facto lawyer who knew how to interpret statutes, regulations and case law better than a real lawyer who had been practicing for 35 years (me).  If you revisit my posts on that topic (if you can stand it), you will see that I truly beat it to death and beyond.  But I will take a look at the franking issue.

____________________________________________________________________________

In my effort to assist my opponents on the "two half bills" issue (no, really, I'm actually interested in how these things evolve), I have now dived into this to the point that I am DONE.  Despite trying about 300 different Google searches, the only additional thing I have found is this from Lamar Waldron's Legacy of Secrecy:

At the time, Oswald had half of a torn box top in his pocket [WRONG], and was perhaps looking for someone with the other half.  (Dollar bills torn in half were later found in his rooming house, indicating Oswald had used that technique before.  The CIA file of Cuban exile leader Manuel Artime confirms that the CIA  also used this technique for Artime during AMWORLD in 1963.)53

 

53.  CIA 104-10240-10337, 7-9-63 memo from Henry D. Hecksher.

So here we see that Waldron (1) invents the notion that Oswald had a "torn box top" in his pocket despite the complete absence of any evidentiary basis for the Cox's lid being torn; (2) states that dollar bills torn in half were found in the rooming house; (3) uses #(2) to speculate that Oswald "had used that technique before"; and (4) footnotes #(1)-(3) with nothing but a reference to a CIA memorandum referring to the use of a torn dollar bill by AMBIDDY-1 (the same one that Armstrong uses to support his theory).

Voila, through error and raw speculation Oswald becomes a CIA guy on a mysterious mission, rather than a terrified assassin looking for someplace, anyplace, to hide and gather his wits.  And so it goes.  (I hate to keep interjecting common sense and logic, but if I were a CIA operative with $13.87 in my pocket on a mission to meet my contact inside the Texas Theater, I probably would have paid the 25 cents to get in, as opposed to risking the entire mission by slipping in behind Julia Postal.  Oswald really was cheap, wasn't he?  Or was that part of The Plan - "Sneak in without paying, it'll be way more exciting for everyone"?)

can you provide link to your posts?

 

[Guest Rich Pope]

"The doctors at the Bethesda autopsy examined the back wound and felt the end of it. It was a shallow wound. It did not traverse the body. The single bullet theory ends there. LN's have not and can not provide one piece of evidence that CE 399 did traverse JFK's body except with what I feel is immature "logic" that willfully rejects any notions that any evidence could be suppressed  - even if there are multiple instances where evidence WAS suppressed in this case."

I like the  most simple explanations and this one fits to end the single-bullet theory.  Just like the fact that the Carcano rifle w/defective scope was not a viable weapon for any one to shoot the president.  Just like the .38 revolver that had a bent firing pin was used to kill J.D. Tippit but later was unusable to shoot Dallas police officers attempting to arrest Oswald.

It's simple facts like these, presented with no name calling and personal attacks that are most useful in discerning what took place on 11/22/63

[Guest]

1 hour ago, Lawrence Schnapf said:

can you provide link to your posts?

At great risk to my sanity, I have revisited my old posts.  The entire Money Order Debate comprises these three threads:

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/topic/22439-yes-postal-money-orders-do-require-bank-endorsements/

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/topic/22602-the-lowdown-on-postal-money-orders-circa-1963/

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/topic/22675-john-armstrong-blasts-the-mail-order-rifle-“evidence”/

My discovery of the File Locator Number - otherwise known as Lance's Greatest Hit - is found on this page:

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/topic/22439-yes-postal-money-orders-do-require-bank-endorsements/page/7/?tab=comments#comment-319002

My other Greatest Hit, insofar as this discussion was concerned, was discovering that the Wilmouth affidavit referenced in Harvey & Lee as proof that postal money orders require bank endorsements in fact says nothing at all about bank endorsements.  I repeatedly challenged the H&L folks to explain and/or correct this, but they of course declined.

I also felt that my explanation as to why postal money orders that are deposited with a Federal Reserve member bank would not require endorsements (whereas those deposited with a non-member bank and entering the Federal Reserve system through a clearinghouse might require them) made a great deal of sense, but Lawyer Sandy disagreed.  Since debating with Lawyer Sandy is as productive as debating with Medical Examiner Cliff, I finally just walked away.

No, I will not be wading into that silly dispute again.  With the discovery of the File Locator Number, I believe that the postal money order mystery is, as someone once said, "Case Closed."

 

[David Josephs]

Y'all seem to forget that the FBI - SA DOLAN in fact - both took the microfilm and left it with Waldman

There is absolutely no way to authenticate that what we see on the microfilm from "HIDELL" was ever on a Klein's order or ever on that microfilm...

In this version (p188 WCD7) - with 3 FBI AGENTS - Waldman keeps the microfilm after they "find the records" and is reported as the GO TO MAN in the event the reel of film was necessary as evidence.

https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=10408#relPageId=195&tab=page

 

Problem being page 189 - the very next page in WCD7 states that we no longer have 3 FBI AGENTS but only one, SA DOLAN
who provides a receipt for said microfilm and TAKES IT...  we learn from the image below this that he has the film reproduced with a copy returned to WALDMAN...

Since the original film is no longer in its box, sure would like a look at the COPY film...

 

3 FBI Agents sign a report saying the film was left with WALDMAN
SA DOLAN writes his own, virtually identical report, but takes the film and has it reproduced....  

We have no idea what images were on what films...  And it is easily proven that payment fro said rifle is FUBAR....

DJ

 

[Jim Harwood]

Deleted

 

Edited September 13, 2019 by Jim Harwood

[Guest]

On 8/18/2019 at 4:06 PM, Bart Kamp said:

Donald Norton.

Thanks to Malcolm Blunt.

Donald P. Norton

Thank you Malcolm Blunt.