We do know that they sent a 40 inch rifle because the Carcano bearing serial number C2766 is a 40 inch rifle.
Are you 100% sure that serial number was exclusive to only a 40" MC rifle?
I'm not saying that the February edition was definitely in stores in December. I'm just saying that it probably was and was almost certainly on store shelves in January.
Again, I don't know why else Klein's would send a 40 inch rifle instead of a 36 inch, other than human error. if it was a mess up on their part then Oswald could have complained about getting an "upgrade". I doubt that he even realized that he did.
I'm not saying that the February edition was definitely in stores in December. I'm just saying that it probably was and was almost certainly on store shelves in January.That doesn't make the point I am making any different. When you have a business and are advertising in a magazine dated February 1963, no matter when it hits the store shelves, it might be a good thing that you ensure that you have enough stock to fill orders for a particular item. Also, if it was not uncommon for Klein's to send a 40" rifle when a 36" was ordered, then why did they bother with the Department coding in the first place?
Again, I don't know why else Klein's would send a 40 inch rifle instead of a 36 inch, other than human error.I also don't know why they would send a 40" rifle instead of the 36" ordered. It seems a bad business practice to do so. Far better would be to inform the client that they had run out of 36" and offer him a 40" or his money back.
Human error is indeed a possibility, although it seems unlikely as Klein's employees William Sharp and Mitch Westra, who worked in the gun department, have both stated to HSCA investigators that Klein's did not sell 40" MC rifles with a four power scope mounted on it.
Another remarkable comment of William Sharp to the HSCA is that he mounted scopes on at least 12 duplicate rifles for the FBI.