One of the most important books in this case is free and online!

[John Mytton]

And they can't check it against the microfilm either as that's been "missing" for decades now!

"missing"

Prove it!

JohnM

[Martin Weidmann]

"missing"

Prove it!

JohnM

Another pathetic LN trick; asking for a negative to be proven.

But let's try this; the Kleins' microfilm is part of the evidence. The FBI took it on 11/23/63 and the WC used it in Waldman's testimony. As such, it should be with all the other evidence in the National Archives, but guess what; it isn't there.

Just ask them and find out for yourself.

[John Mytton]

Another pathetic LN trick; asking for a negative to be proven.

But let's try this; the Kleins' microfilm is part of the evidence. The FBI took it on 11/23/63 and the WC used it in Waldman's testimony. As such, it should be with all the other evidence in the National Archives, but guess what; it isn't there.

Just ask them and find out for yourself.

Just ask them and find out for yourself.

It's YOUR claim, now prove it! Thanks in advance.

JohnM

[John Mytton]

Mr Waldman verified that the microfilm No. 270502 which are Kleins business records showed a purchase of this particular rifle(C2766) to a A J Hidell Post Office Box 2915, Dallas, Tex.

Mr. BELIN. I wonder if we can adjourn the deposition upstairs to take a look at these records in the microfilm and get copies of the appropriate records that you found on the evening of November 22.
Mr. WALDMAN. Yes.
(Whereupon, the following proceedings were had at the microfilm machine.)
Mr. BELIN. Mr. Waldman, you have just put the microfilm which we call D-77 into your viewer which is marked a Microfilm Reader-Printer, and you have identified this as No. 270502, according to your records. Is this just a record number of yours on this particular shipment?
Mr. WALDMAN. That's a number which we assign for identification purposes.
Mr. BELIN. And on the microfilm record, would you please state who it shows this particular rifle was shipped
Mr. WALDMAN. Shipped to a Mr. A.--last name H-i-d-e-l-l, Post Office Box 2915, Dallas, Tex.

JohnM

[Martin Weidmann]

It's YOUR claim, now prove it! Thanks in advance.

JohnM

I already have, but it seems you are too dumb to understand it.

[Martin Weidmann]

Mr Waldman verified that the microfilm No. 270502 which are Kleins business records showed a purchase of this particular rifle(C2766) to a A J Hidell Post Office Box 2915, Dallas, Tex.

Mr. BELIN. I wonder if we can adjourn the deposition upstairs to take a look at these records in the microfilm and get copies of the appropriate records that you found on the evening of November 22.
Mr. WALDMAN. Yes.
(Whereupon, the following proceedings were had at the microfilm machine.)
Mr. BELIN. Mr. Waldman, you have just put the microfilm which we call D-77 into your viewer which is marked a Microfilm Reader-Printer, and you have identified this as No. 270502, according to your records. Is this just a record number of yours on this particular shipment?
Mr. WALDMAN. That's a number which we assign for identification purposes.
Mr. BELIN. And on the microfilm record, would you please state who it shows this particular rifle was shipped
Mr. WALDMAN. Shipped to a Mr. A.--last name H-i-d-e-l-l, Post Office Box 2915, Dallas, Tex.

JohnM

Oh, the desperation. This is still Waldman looking at Waldman 7 and explaining what the information on the document means.

Waldman did not handle the Hidell order, nor did he pack the rifle and brought it to Parcel Post. In other words; he hasn't got a clue if the rifle was really sent or not, so his opinion isn't evidence of the rifle being sent.

I've been trying to explain the difference to you in several posts by now and you still don't get it?

Although you will probably ignore it, as you did the first time, let me ask this question again. Let's say you order something from Amazon and pay for it, but the package doesn't arrive. So, you contact Amazon and they tell you that according to their documents the package was sent, so they won't do anything, would you accept that answer?

[John Mytton]

Let's say you order something from Amazon and pay for it, but the package doesn't arrive. So, you contact Amazon and they tell you that according to their documents the package was sent, so they won't do anything, would you accept that answer?

How is this even relevant?

Kleins sent a package and Oswald was photographed with what the package contained. End of story!



JohnM