POLL. Is John Iacoletti right to separate the coupon from the envelope in CE773?

[John Iacoletti]

As is usual in this case, the documentary evidence has no problems. The FBI agent is writing a report of what happened on the night of the 22nd. Waldman testifies that on the 22nd they extracted the information and then picked up the microfilm the next day.

Hold the phone.  Where does it say anything about the 22nd?  It's dated the 23rd, the same day the film was allegedly given to SA Dolan by Waldman.  According to CD 87, the FBI was at Klein's from 10 PM on the 22nd until 5:00 am on the 23rd and Waldman gave them the microfilm.  So why would they say that he put it in his safe until it was necessary to subpeona?

https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=10490#relPageId=91&tab=page

The question is, did Waldman even look at this film before the FBI confiscated it?

But what I don't understand is how can Kleins do business without that record, as I previously posted those rifle records and who purchased them must be legally important for someone to have access to, surely?

The FBI supposedly made a copy of the microfilm on Dec 4 so that Klein's could have their business records (http://jfk.hood.edu/Collection/FBI%20Records%20Files/105-82555/105-82555%20Section%20037/105-37b.pdf).  So what happened to the copy as well as to the original?

[John Mytton]

Hold the phone.  Where does it say anything about the 22nd?  It's dated the 23rd, the same day the film was allegedly given to SA Dolan by Waldman.  According to CD 87, the FBI was at Klein's from 10 PM on the 22nd until 5:00 am on the 23rd and Waldman gave them the microfilm.  So why would they say that he put it in his safe until it was necessary to subpeona?

https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=10490#relPageId=91&tab=page

The question is, did Waldman even look at this film before the FBI confiscated it?

The FBI supposedly made a copy of the microfilm on Dec 4 so that Klein's could have their business records (http://jfk.hood.edu/Collection/FBI%20Records%20Files/105-82555/105-82555%20Section%20037/105-37b.pdf).  So what happened to the copy as well as to the original?

Isn't the document you originally linked to dated the 26th?

The problem as I see it is that there is no information on how long the microfilm was in the safe and at what time the FBI took the film from the safe, you're just making assumptions.

Btw wouldn't have Waldman seen the microfilm when he discovered the Hidelll order?
Mr. WALDMAN. We were able to determine from our purchase records the date in which the rifle had been received

JohnM

[John Iacoletti]

Isn't the document you originally linked to dated the 26th?

No, it's dated the 23rd (dictated on the 26th).

The problem as I see it is that there is no information on how long the microfilm was in the safe and at what time the FBI took the film from the safe, you're just making assumptions.

It's just contradictory.  Either they took it on the early morning of the 23rd after being there all night, or they left it with him to put in his safe until they needed it at a later date.  Unless he put it in his safe at say 3 am and then they decided they needed it after all at 5 am, in which case why even mention that he put it in his safe?

Btw wouldn't have Waldman seen the microfilm when he discovered the Hidelll order?

How do we know that Waldman discovered the Hidell order?

Mr. WALDMAN. We were able to determine from our purchase records the date in which the rifle had been received

Isn't he talking about the date that Klein's purchased and received the rifle from Crescent?

[John Mytton]

No, it's dated the 23rd (dictated on the 26th).

It's just contradictory.  Either they took it on the early morning of the 23rd after being there all night, or they left it with him to put in his safe until they needed it at a later date.  Unless he put it in his safe at say 3 am and then they decided they needed it after all at 5 am, in which case why even mention that he put it in his safe?

How do we know that Waldman discovered the Hidell order?

Isn't he talking about the date that Klein's purchased and received the rifle from Crescent?

No, it's dated the 23rd (dictated on the 26th).

The document is dated the 26th, the stuff happened on the 23rd.

Unless he put it in his safe at say 3 am and then they decided they needed it after all at 5 am, in which case why even mention that he put it in his safe?

That's what I theorised and one agent who went home early or was just taking a whizz dictated the document on the 26th and wasn't in a position to be aware that they took the microfilm, no one has to lie, well unless the 26th dictation was by Dolan?

Isn't he talking about the date that Klein's purchased and received the rifle from Crescent?

Yeah, for some reason my Waldman quote cut short, here's the entire statement.

Mr. WALDMAN. We were able to determine from our purchase records the date in which the rifle had been received, and they also had a record of when it had been shipped, so we knew the approximate date of receipt by us, and from that we made---let's see, we examined our microfilm records which show orders from mail order customers and related papers, and from this determined to whom the gun had been shipped by us.

JohnM

[John Iacoletti]

Mr. WALDMAN. We were able to determine from our purchase records the date in which the rifle had been received, and they also had a record of when it had been shipped, so we knew the approximate date of receipt by us, and from that we made---let's see, we examined our microfilm records which show orders from mail order customers and related papers, and from this determined to whom the gun had been shipped by us.

This is really peculiar.  Who is "they"?  The FBI?  What record would they have of when it had been shipped?

"and from that we made---let's see, we examined our microfilm records".  A little Freudian slip there?

[Peter Kleinschmidt]

Guess what? When you produce the microfilm, you will then be able to say that it is in itself the evidence proving it exists. Not that complicated, a reasonable person will not roll over just because you tried to answer a question with a question.

You said there was microfilm

I said "Where is it?

Your answer --well, you did not have an answer instead you pick a game of tennis by saying "where's the evidence that it is missing?"

My answer to that question is I did not claim it exists or does not exist. I sure am not going to take your word for it, you yourself don't even know if it does or not.

BTW This is exactly why you are unable to make a point and if you ask "were they lying too?" I don't know who is lying but they sure fooled you

[John Mytton]

Guess what? When you produce the microfilm, you will then be able to say that it is in itself the evidence proving it exists. Not that complicated, a reasonable person will not roll over just because you tried to answer a question with a question.

You said there was microfilm

I said "Where is it?

Your answer --well, you did not have an answer instead you pick a game of tennis by saying "where's the evidence that it is missing?"

My answer to that question is I did not claim it exists or does not exist. I sure am not going to take your word for it, you yourself don't even know if it does or not.

BTW This is exactly why you are unable to make a point and if you ask "were they lying too?" I don't know who is lying but they sure fooled you

For a start the microfilm was verified by Waldman to be authentic, you lose.

Btw Einstein, even if the microfilm was examined, who is left alive to verify that the microfilm actually came from Kleins, that boat has long sailed, try something new.

JohnM