Free Book Now Available -- Hasty Judgment: Why the JFK Case Is Not Closed

[John Mytton]

Which part of the testimony do you not understand?

Mr. BELIN. Do you have any master control ledger or book of any kind that has these control numbers on them?
Mr. SCIBOR. Yes. One copy is sent to what we call the booking department, and those are put into a master book, control book.
Mr. BELIN. Are you required by law to keep records of serial numbers of guns?
Mr. SCIBOR. Yes.

Yawn! Are you still banging on about this? This basic concept has already been explained to you, this time listen closely

Business records are perfectly acceptable as evidence. The Kleins business record(Waldman 4) indicates C2766 was received by Kleins. And Kleins business record( Waldman 7) indicates that C2766 was sent to Oswald's PO box. Case Closed!

Mr. BELIN. Well, I hand you what has been marked as Waldman Deposition Exhibit No. 4 and ask you to state if you know what this is.
Mr. WALDMAN. This is the record created by us showing the control number we have assigned to the gun together with the serial number that is imprinted in the frame of the gun.
Mr. BELIN. Now, this is a photostat, I believe, of records you have in front of you on your desk right now?
Mr. WALDMAN. That's correct.
Mr. BELIN. Do you find anywhere on Waldman Deposition Exhibit No. 4 the serial number C--2766?
Mr. WALDMAN. Yes.
Mr. BELIN. And what is your control number for that?
Mr. WALDMAN. Our control number for that is VC-836.



Mr. BELIN. ...Now, I'm going to hand you what has been marked as Waldman Deposition Exhibit No. 7 and ask you to state if you know what this is.
Mr. WALDMAN. This is a cops made from our microfilm reader-printer of Dallas, Tex. I want to clarify that this is not the order, itself, received from Mr. Hidell, but it's a form created by us internally from an order received from Mr. Hidell on a small coupon taken from an advertisement of ours in a magazine.
Mr. BELIN. This Waldman Deposition Exhibit No. 7 is a print from the micro- film negative which we just viewed upstair; is that correct?
Mr. WALDMAN. That's correct.



JohnM

[Martin Weidmann]

Johnny,

What do you think does Waldman 7 prove exactly?

[Tim Nickerson]

The link doesn't work for you?

Which part of the testimony do you not understand?

The link works fine but it still doesn't help me understand this:

Quote from: Otto Beck on August 06, 2020, 07:37:59 AM
"Because that was the alleged purpose of producing the the original to Waldman 4."

Mr. BELIN. Do you have any master control ledger or book of any kind that has these control numbers on them?
Mr. SCIBOR. Yes. One copy is sent to what we call the booking department, and those are put into a master book, control book.
Mr. BELIN. Are you required by law to keep records of serial numbers of guns?
Mr. SCIBOR. Yes.

Yeah, and? Scibor acknowledged that they were required by law to keep records of serial numbers of guns. They kept at least two copies of them. One copy being in a master book. He said nothing at all about the law requiring those records to be kept in a master book.

Why are you asking me?

Because it's your claim, that's why.   Where do you get that they were required by law to keep the control and serial numbers in a master book? What specific Federal or State of Illinois law required those records to be kept in a master book?

[Tim Nickerson]

Which part of this statement do you not understand?

"He stated that the original of this report is directed at the company recording and booking department, where it is entered into a master booking system and the original of this report is then destroyed."

I understand that statement. What I don't understand is this:

"Because that was the alleged purpose of producing the the original to Waldman 4."

Right, I see where your semantic game is headed....

But it doesn't help you one bit. The Klein's official record of serial (and control) numbers, if the law dropped by, would be the "master book".

I'm not playing a semantics game here. You claimed that Klein's was required by law to keep their records of serial (and control) numbers in a master book. You've just repeated that claim. Where do you get that they were required by law to keep the control and serial numbers in a master book? What specific Federal or State of Illinois law required those records to be kept in a master book?

Waldman #4 is a record that Klein's kept of the serial and control numbers.

See above.

See above.

[Tim Nickerson]

So you do understand that W4 is claimed to be a copy of an original alleged to be the source of the numbers in the master book?

Yes, I do understand that.

Wrong, I did not repeat that claim, I carefully rephrased it:

You worded it differently but the meaning is the same.

The Klein's official record of serial (and control) numbers, if the law dropped by, would be the "master book".

Prove it.

They could simply have filed the original coming out of the receiving department but put extra effort into copying the numbers into the master book, then destroying the original. There can be no doubt the master (or control) book is where they kept serial numbers to comply with the law. Waldman 4 was for Scibor's convenience.

Again, prove it.

[John Mytton]

The Klein's official record of serial (and control) numbers, if the law dropped by, would be the "master book".

Guess what Einstein, the law did drop by and Kleins readily retrieved all the relevant paperwork! LOL!
Kleins traced where they received the rifle from.
Kleins traced their catalogue number.
Kleins traced who bought the rifle
Kleins traced where they sent the rifle.
Kleins business records as required by law allowed them to successfully achieve these results.

Btw keep trying because watching you dig a deeper hole with every post amuses me.

JohnM

 

[Tim Nickerson]

What does "master" and "control" suggest?

You claim that Klein's official record of serial (and control) numbers, if the law dropped by, would be the "master book".

Where's your proof?

See above.

What? You claimed that Klein's was required by law to keep the control and serial numbers in a master book. How does what you stated above substantiate that claim? What specific Federal or State of Illinois law required those records to be kept in a master book?

[Tim Nickerson]

It wasn't W4, so you're left with be the master or control book since the original was destroyed. That's why Scibor used the terms "master" and "control".

Is it that difficult for you?

With the original destroyed, Waldman 4 was just as acceptable as the master book. It was a record of the serial number and the control number. I don't know what you mean by "control book". The control number was just a booking number used by Klein's to record the history of the gun while it was in their possession.

Rephrased several posts back, see above. You can stop the BS.

So, now you're saying that keeping the records of the serial and control numbers in a master book was not required by law? We don't need to see the master book afterall? That's what I've been saying. We are now in agreement.