|
Post by Michael Capasse on Jan 2, 2019 11:01:25 GMT -5
This thread will attempt to trace the rifle from Crescent Firearms to Klein’s Sporting Goods.
In 1958, Crescent Firearms (under the name Adam Consolidated Industries), purchased 500,000 rifles from the Italian Government. The final shipment of those rifles (520 cartons) left Italy’s port of Genoa after being identified as lot number 91594 and arrived in the New York via the steamer Elettra Fassio on October 25, 1960. The 520 cartons were removed and trucked by the Waterfront Transfer Company to the Harborside Terminal,
a bonded warehouse in New Jersey.
These are the ranges of carton numbers. We are in carton number 3376. The shipment was placed in storage and remained there for the next two years.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Enter Fred Rupp, he is a federally licensed gun dealer hired by Crescent to pick up rifles at the Harborside Warehouse and inspect, clean, test-fire, repack and ship them to Crescent’s retail customers.
Klein’s purchase order of 1/15/62 requested that 400 model 91TS rifles be delivered. (REMEMBER: this is the 36″ rifle)
PRIOR TO 4/13/62, KLEIN’S RIFLE ORDER WAS FOR THE 91/38 TS, WHICH ONLY CAME IN 36″ LENGTHS.
These are broken down into delivery orders. According to Harborside delivery order # 89138, Rupp removed the first 170 cartons on August 29, 1962. A list of the numbers of the cartons removed was on this manifest.
Carton 3376 is not part of that manifest.
We are told this is the ONLY manifest from this shipment that Mr. Rupp noted the serial numbers.
Importers of rifles and gun dealers were required BY LAW to maintain a list of SERIAL NUMBERS of the rifles they imported.
And Klein’s was required to keep the serial numbers of rifle they sold to retail customers.
|
|
|
Post by Michael Capasse on Jan 2, 2019 11:01:46 GMT -5
Mitchell J. SciborEmployee, Klein's Sports Goods.Mr. BELIN. Do you have any master control ledger or book of any kind that has these control numbers on them? Mr. SCIBOR. Yes. One copy is sent to what we call the booking department, and those are put into a master book, control book. Mr. BELIN. Are you required by law to keep records of serial numbers of guns?
Mr. SCIBOR. Yes.When the HSCA contacted Mr. Scibor in 1978, he was less than cooperative in this matter:
Rupp removed a total of 434 Mannlicher Carcano 91/38 rifles in the month of October 1962 from the lot of 520 rifles (91594) belonging to Crescent Firearms.
He told the FBI that he kept no record of the carton numbers or serial numbers of the rifles he removed from Harborside. (CD 7, pg. 180)
In other words, THERE IS NO EVIDENCE THAT CARTON 3376 WAS AMONG the 434 rifles removed by Rupp, even though the FBI said it was.
|
|
|
Post by Michael Capasse on Jan 2, 2019 11:02:03 GMT -5
There are two documents the WC uses to “prove” carton 3376 was among these shipments is Crescent Firearms invoice # 3178. Mr Waldman should be able to verify what rifles go with what invoice when they are paid: Mr. BELIN. Mr. Waldman, referring to Waldman Deposition Exhibit No. 3, which are the serial numbers of the 100 rifles which were made in this shipment from Crescent Firearms to you…….is there any way to verify that this payment pertained to rifles which are shown on Waldman Deposition Exhibit No. 3?
Mr. WALDMAN. The forms submitted by Crescent Firearms showing serial numbers of rifles included in the shipment covered by their invoice No. 3178 indicate that the rifle carrying serial No. C-2766 was included in that shipment.
NOPE. Take a close look at the invoice. – see the check marks that verify each one? Where is the mark for carton 3376?
Carton 3376 was never verified as being a part of that shipment. The FBI’s ” tracking of the rifle “ included unsigned and undated documents and manifests.
|
|
|
Post by Michael Capasse on Jan 2, 2019 11:02:19 GMT -5
The second document the WC uses to “prove” the shipment of the rifle, is a series of handwritten “carton slips” called Waldman Exhibit 03.
Waldman Exhibit 3 is an undated and unsigned list of ten carton slips, which allegedly made up the February shipment from Crescent to Klein’s.
Listed on each of the ten carton slips are the serial numbers of the 10 rifles in each carton, including carton 3376. Since there are no dates on any of the slips in Waldman Exhibit 3, it serves no purpose in proving that carton 3376 and thus the C2766 rifle was part of the February shipment.
|
|
|
Post by Michael Capasse on Jan 2, 2019 11:02:39 GMT -5
When compared to Klein’s Receiving Record, these numbers are all over the place and do not appear to have been pulled in the proper sequence one would expect in one sitting.
Then when Belin asked Scibor did he do the writing on this receiving record…
Mr. BELIN. And did you do any of that writing at all? Mr. SCIBOR. No. So why does he now denounce ownership of that record?!Note the FBI report related to November 23rd, show that record, if fabricated, was created as part of the search at Klein’s. Also, the wording in that report leaves no doubt that the control numbers were assigned as the rifles were taken from the boxes which makes perfect sense as they also tagged each rifle. They would stamp the VC number on the sheet and tag, read S/N from rifle, note it on sheet and tag, tag rifle and finally advance digit(s) on stamp and move on to next rifle in box (or grab next box).
|
|
|
Post by Michael Capasse on Jan 2, 2019 11:04:05 GMT -5
Are all these 40″ rifles? Cadigan Exhibit 01 says there are 908 orders captured on microfilm.(270596-269688) The Hidell stamped order is 270502. There are over 800 orders prior and 186 orders after Hidell. In the almost 1000 orders, there is only ONE order for C20-T750. The ONLY designation for size that has been switched from any rifle in this shipment.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
How can the WC conclude C2766 was sent to satisfy this order, when THERE IS NO EVIDENCE THAT CARTON 3376 WAS AMONG the 434 cartons removed by Rupp, though the FBI said it was. [there is no serial number C2766 on record.]
Given the facts in evidence how can anyone prove a connection between those carton numbers from Italy being untouched, unchanged group of 100 rifles shipped to Klein’s in Feb. 1963. One shipping document that actually lists carton numbers specifically excludes #3376 from those checked off.
434 cartons of rifles have been removed from storage at Harbourside between 4/13/62 and 02/23/63. [Keep in mind the number M91/38 alone is only half the rifle’s size designation.] Yet we are offered NO evidence for where these 86 remaining cartons went– what happened to them?–What size were they? or what the packing list said regarding serial number.
–perhaps no rifle was ever shipped [to Klein’s] after all.
[sourced from: David Joseph's "The Klein's Rifle" , Gil Jesus, Harold Weisberg, with help from Tom Sorensen]
|
|
|
Post by Tom Sorensen on Jun 9, 2019 5:40:13 GMT -5
I'm posting this video for reference...it's a rather rushed presentation by David Josephs regarding the C 2766 Carcano allegedly sold by Klein's:
Josephs presents a real nugget related to the mystery affidavit by Feldsott of Crescent Firearms that I've not seen before, screenshot here: As stated, it appears the content of the affidavit didn't come from Feldsott -- he was just asked to sign it. To my knowledge the date June 18, 1962 is not referenced or connected to any other exhibit anywhere in the WC volumes. What happened to those records mentioned?
I doubt Rankin had a clue what he sent to Feldsott, because that date doesn't support any of the WC claims. Why would a rifle "sold" on June 18, 1962 not show up in the Klein's receiving department until eight month later?
|
|
|
Post by Tom Sorensen on Sept 8, 2020 7:37:42 GMT -5
When compared to Klein’s Receiving Record, these numbers are all over the place and do not appear to have been pulled in the proper sequence one would expect in one sitting.
Then when Belin asked Scibor did he do the writing on this receiving record…
Mr. BELIN. And did you do any of that writing at all? Mr. SCIBOR. No. So why does he now denounce ownership of that record?!Note the FBI report related to November 23rd, show that record, if fabricated, was created as part of the search at Klein’s. Also, the wording in that report leaves no doubt that the control numbers were assigned as the rifles were taken from the boxes which makes perfect sense as they also tagged each rifle. They would stamp the VC number on the sheet and tag, read S/N from rifle, note it on sheet and tag, tag rifle and finally advance digit(s) on stamp and move on to next rifle in box (or grab next box).So, who made the original receiving record which Walman 4 is supposed to be a copy of? Going over the FBI report describing the procedure outlined by SCIBOR I also, until recently, believed he's the one who "had made" the receiving record while in fact the wording is ambiguous. It can also be interpreted as a record he "had made" upon his request! Note how his denying ownership of this record is given exactly this spin by BELIN: Mr. BELIN. And did you do any of that writing at all? Mr. SCIBOR. No. Mr. BELIN. What is the fact as to whether or not these serial numbers are assigned by people under your supervision? Mr. SCIBOR. Repeat that.
Mr. BELIN. Well, do you have any supervision or control over the people making the entries on the serial numbers and your control numbers? Mr. SCIBOR. Yes.
The FBI is known to deliberately obfuscate facts in their reports and this could be another example of deliberately introducing ambiguity to allow SCIBOR to denounce ownership during questioning. IMO this wasn't needed, and SCIBOR wouldn't be confused, if in fact he or his staff had done the writing! As for the assignment of control numbers and recording of serial numbers, as well as tagging of the rifles, even to this day one can get stamps designed for sequential numbering as required on the receiving record. Assuming that at least the layout of Waldman 4 is not fake, I'm sure the receiving department would have first stamped the bold faced VC numbers on the sheets and tags before opening any cases. Then, one case at a time, the guns were taken from the case, the serial number recorded (on sheet and tag) and the rifle was tagged; seems to be the most rational procedure to me. Also, as already mentioned, this implies that the serial numbers recorded would be grouped according to the packing slips. The lack of grouping as seen in Waldman 4 suggests all boxes were initially opened and all 100 rifles dumped in a pile before being processed -- I doubt it! EDIT:
|
|