Post by Gil Jesus on Jul 11, 2021 11:19:41 GMT -5
EVIDENCE THE MONEY ORDER WAS NEVER DEPOSITED
Still another problem with the purchasing of the rifle involves the alleged deposit of the "Hidell" money order by Klein's Sporting Goods. Waldman 10 shows that the $13,000 deposit had a deposit slip of 2/15/63. If you look at that exhibit, you'll see that the date at the bottom of the bulk statement is the date "3-13"63". I believe that these two documents represent a deposit which was made on 2/15/63, the bulk list being a bank statement dated 3/13/63 for the account activity for the month of February.
Before the naysayers respond that the deposit slip could have been in an honest mistake, I would like to point out that BOTH the month AND the day are wrong ( if you buy the deposit being made on 3/13/63 ). I could see an error on the month at the beginning of the month, but an error on the MONTH AND DAY in the MIDDLE of a month? IMO, it's pretty hard to believe it's an honest mistake. Besides, no bank would accept a deposit slip with the wrong date of deposit.
From the evidence I've seen, the FBI apparently used a 2/15/63 deposit of an American Express Money Order and tried to pass it off as a 3/13/63 deposit of a postal money order.
Let me explain why I believe that.
In Commission Document 7, pg. 192 ( below ) , Robert Wilmouth, Vice President of the First National Bank of Chicago, Klein's bank, told the FBI that there were TWO deposits of $ 21.45 and the one in the $ 13,827.98 deposit ( Waldman 10 ) was an American Express money order, NOT the postal money order sent by "A. Hidell". He said that "the item appeared on a tape between an item of $ 15.08 and an item of $ 14.36, precisely where David Belin put a mark on Waldman 10.
Wilmouth was specific in his identification of the AmEx money order. He said that it was on a tape between deposits of $ 15.03 and $ 14.36, precisely the deposit that the WC said was the postal money order sent by "A. Hidell".
They didn't use an actual March deposit slip because that one would have included a bank statement dated the middle of April.
It seems to me, looking at the evidence, that Klein's never had a deposit of $ 21.45 in March of 1963 but had 2 in February.
The problem with a February deposit, obviously, was that neither of the deposits could have been a "Hidell" postal money order with a postal stamp of 3/12. So the FBI took the bank statement dated 3/13/63, which was actually for the 2/15 deposit, and claimed that it was all part of a 3/13 deposit.
Again, that's my opinion, based on what I've seen.
Absent the dated stamp of the bank, it was IMPOSSIBLE to say when and IF the money order had been deposited. It was particularly difficult for Waldman in his testimony to nail down the WHEN.
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.( 7 H 367-368 )
That's because it was never deposited.
We know that the $ 21.45 deposit they are referring to is an American Express Money Order and NOT the "Hidell" postal order because it is described IN DETAIL by Robert Wilmouth, Vice President of the First National Bank of Chicago, Klein's bank. His description is so precise that he described the entries listed before and after the "$ 21.45" in Waldman 10 to their exact penny.
That's pretty credible to me.
Needless to say, Robert Wilmouth never appeared on the FBI's witness list to testify before the Commission and identify the "Hidell" money order as having passed through his bank, either in live testimony or by deposition.
If the deposit was made in February as the evidence says, then the $ 21.45 in Waldman 10's deposit of $ 13.827.98 couldn't possibly be the "Hidell" money order.
Still another problem with the purchasing of the rifle involves the alleged deposit of the "Hidell" money order by Klein's Sporting Goods. Waldman 10 shows that the $13,000 deposit had a deposit slip of 2/15/63. If you look at that exhibit, you'll see that the date at the bottom of the bulk statement is the date "3-13"63". I believe that these two documents represent a deposit which was made on 2/15/63, the bulk list being a bank statement dated 3/13/63 for the account activity for the month of February.
Before the naysayers respond that the deposit slip could have been in an honest mistake, I would like to point out that BOTH the month AND the day are wrong ( if you buy the deposit being made on 3/13/63 ). I could see an error on the month at the beginning of the month, but an error on the MONTH AND DAY in the MIDDLE of a month? IMO, it's pretty hard to believe it's an honest mistake. Besides, no bank would accept a deposit slip with the wrong date of deposit.
From the evidence I've seen, the FBI apparently used a 2/15/63 deposit of an American Express Money Order and tried to pass it off as a 3/13/63 deposit of a postal money order.
Let me explain why I believe that.
In Commission Document 7, pg. 192 ( below ) , Robert Wilmouth, Vice President of the First National Bank of Chicago, Klein's bank, told the FBI that there were TWO deposits of $ 21.45 and the one in the $ 13,827.98 deposit ( Waldman 10 ) was an American Express money order, NOT the postal money order sent by "A. Hidell". He said that "the item appeared on a tape between an item of $ 15.08 and an item of $ 14.36, precisely where David Belin put a mark on Waldman 10.
Wilmouth was specific in his identification of the AmEx money order. He said that it was on a tape between deposits of $ 15.03 and $ 14.36, precisely the deposit that the WC said was the postal money order sent by "A. Hidell".
They didn't use an actual March deposit slip because that one would have included a bank statement dated the middle of April.
It seems to me, looking at the evidence, that Klein's never had a deposit of $ 21.45 in March of 1963 but had 2 in February.
The problem with a February deposit, obviously, was that neither of the deposits could have been a "Hidell" postal money order with a postal stamp of 3/12. So the FBI took the bank statement dated 3/13/63, which was actually for the 2/15 deposit, and claimed that it was all part of a 3/13 deposit.
Again, that's my opinion, based on what I've seen.
Absent the dated stamp of the bank, it was IMPOSSIBLE to say when and IF the money order had been deposited. It was particularly difficult for Waldman in his testimony to nail down the WHEN.
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.( 7 H 367-368 )
That's because it was never deposited.
We know that the $ 21.45 deposit they are referring to is an American Express Money Order and NOT the "Hidell" postal order because it is described IN DETAIL by Robert Wilmouth, Vice President of the First National Bank of Chicago, Klein's bank. His description is so precise that he described the entries listed before and after the "$ 21.45" in Waldman 10 to their exact penny.
That's pretty credible to me.
Needless to say, Robert Wilmouth never appeared on the FBI's witness list to testify before the Commission and identify the "Hidell" money order as having passed through his bank, either in live testimony or by deposition.
If the deposit was made in February as the evidence says, then the $ 21.45 in Waldman 10's deposit of $ 13.827.98 couldn't possibly be the "Hidell" money order.