Lee Harvey Oswald Ordered The Rifle

[John Iacoletti]

"If the whole paper trail for the revolver was completely phony, why in the world did the plotters want to have Oswald paying for the gun via COD?

When the evidence doesn’t support the narrative, why do nutters always fall back on “why would plotters do that” arguments?

There’s either evidence of this alleged COD payment or there is not.

[David Von Pein]

There’s either evidence of this alleged COD payment or there is not.

There is. CTers, of course, will forever ignore it, but there is evidence that the COD balance of $19.95 was paid to Seaport. It's in Heinz Michaelis' WC testimony [7 H 378-379]....

JOE BALL -- "Is there anything in your files which shows that the Railway Express did remit to you the $19.95?"

HEINZ MICHAELIS -- "The fact that the exhibit number...was attached to the red copy of the invoice...indicates that the money was received."

Plus, the word "Paid" is written right on the Seaport invoice too (Michaelis Exhibit No. 2). But I guess CTers must think the word "PAID" means exactly the opposite and that Seaport never received the $19.95 balance at all, huh? ~shrug~

[Jerry Freeman]

http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2010/08/dvp-vs-dieugenio-part-42.html
Pistol Talk....   
  "Oswald's P.O. Box was at the Main Post Office in the Federal Building, 1114 Commerce Street

BTW..that's not correct. The old MPO was at Bryan and North St Paul. The bldg is still called that on the map
 but was converted into luxury apartments.
 I know all about the old MPO because I worked there as a postal clerk. 

[John Iacoletti]

Plus, the word "Paid" is written right on the Seaport invoice too (Michaelis Exhibit No. 2). But I guess CTers must think the word "PAID" means exactly the opposite and that Seaport never received the $19.95 balance at all, huh? ~shrug~

The word “paid” is written in the blank that says “excise tax”, but regardless...

Anyone can write the word “paid” on a piece of paper during or after the fact. But if this was paid by Oswald or somebody else, It would have gone into a till and ultimately ended up in Railway Express account somewhere with a paper trail, along with a transfer of those funds back to Seaport Traders into their account somewhere with a paper trail. When and how did any of this happen if the transaction was legitimate?

It was bad enough that Klein’s trotted out a February deposit slip for an alleged March transaction, but Railway Express and Seaport Traders didn’t even have that.

[John Iacoletti]

BTW..that's not correct. The old MPO was at Bryan and North St Paul. The bldg is still called that on the map
 but was converted into luxury apartments.
 I know all about the old MPO because I worked there as a postal clerk.

Interesting, Jerry. When you worked there, what time on weekday mornings did you open up the clerk stations for selling money orders?

[Jerry Freeman]

Interesting, Jerry. When you worked there, what time on weekday mornings did you open up the clerk stations for selling money orders?

I was a sorting clerk. The window clerks opened [as they do now] at 8 AM. The main Dallas Post Office was in the Federal Courthouse [Postal Inspector/FBI informant Harry Holmes office was also there for interest]
After reviewing his [DVP] links, I am still confused about the COD delivery of the Smith .38---

[A] further charge that "no record exists to show that Hidell/Oswald ever took possession of [the rifle and pistol]." [21] The charge infers that there should be a record, when in fact, none was required. Robert C. Hendon, Vice President in Charge of Operations, Railway Express Agency (REA) did propose to the Dodd Committee a change in the law which would require a consignee to sign a delivery receipt which would be retained by the carrier. [22] But, at the time of the Oswald order, REA Express rules did not require such a signature.

So someone apparently showed up and presented the HIDELL cards like were allegedly found on Oswald...told someone he wanted his gun...handed over 19.95 and then left. The only "proof" that this is what happened is the ticket copy and that really isn't much at all. The accompanying testimony in the Warren Report is made by someone who wasn't there. This handwriting expert stuff is just laughable.

Texas law states that one who wishes to purchase a pistol or handgun must first obtain from a justice of the peace, county judge, or district judge of the county of his residence a certificate of good character. [25] Although REA Express would withhold shipments to consignees who failed to display a license or permit in states requiring same, REA regulations do not specifically address whether a shipment would be withheld if a certificate of good character was not presented.

See the contradiction?

The package was shipped C.O.D. to: A.J. Hidell, P.O. Box 2915, Dallas, Texas, with a balance of $19.95 due, plus C.O.D. charges. Two REA Express documents accompanied the shipment: (1) a description of the contents of the package [33], and (2) a C.O.D. document directing REA to remit the amount collected to Seaport Traders. [34]

This was certainly a roundabout way of a delivery...because it didn't matter what the Railway express rules and terms were...it was back on the USPO to ascertain a proper legal delivery. So Hidell signed nothing ...He didn't have to. There was no addressed ID?...He didn't need one...What happens to all these notification of delivery cards? Who cares? So the counter clerk just throws it away?...a violation BTW.





It still remains that even [hypothetically]  if the rifle and Smith were ordered on the same day...paid for [by different methods yet] on the same day... the odds of their arriving for pick-up on the same day are really quite remote. And apparently all at the same post office [where Harry Holmes worked]

[Martin Weidmann]

There is. CTers, of course, will forever ignore it, but there is evidence that the COD balance of $19.95 was paid to Seaport. It's in Heinz Michaelis' WC testimony [7 H 378-379]....

JOE BALL -- "Is there anything in your files which shows that the Railway Express did remit to you the $19.95?"

HEINZ MICHAELIS -- "The fact that the exhibit number...was attached to the red copy of the invoice...indicates that the money was received."

Plus, the word "Paid" is written right on the Seaport invoice too (Michaelis Exhibit No. 2). But I guess CTers must think the word "PAID" means exactly the opposite and that Seaport never received the $19.95 balance at all, huh? ~shrug~

Sorry, David, but this is an extremely weak argument.

All this really tells us is that Michaelis concludes from a red copy of the invoice being attached that payment was received. That's all!

It does not show in any way or form that Michaelis actually knew for sure the payment was recieved. One thing we do know for sure though is that no document has ever surfaced regarding a money transfer of $19.95 from Dallas to Seaport. On a matter, as important as this one and with all the investigative power of the FBI available, why do you, David, think that is so? Are you really going to tell us that investigators were unable to trace a simple transfer and thus needed to rely upon a conclusion made by a manager like Michaelis?

[Jerry Freeman]

Sorry, David, but this is a extremely weak argument....It does not show  that Michaelis actually knew for sure the payment was received. One thing we do know for sure is that no document has ever surfaced regarding a money transfer of $19.95 from Dallas to Seaport. 

Even if there was...there is no record [that I can find] verifying from whom the payment was received--- making for an even more feeble argument.