Ordering the Revolver

On an unknown date, Seaport Traders received an order blank, taken from an unknown magazine, from an “A.J. Hidell” for a Smith & Wesson .38 revolver with a 2″ barrel.
Some folks have suggested that “Hidell” ordered a .38 Special for $ 39.95 but received a “.38 St. W” for $ 29.95.
The order blank does not show that, however.

The order blank was filled out to reflect an order for one “.38 St.W. 2″ Bbl.” for 29.95. I believe that the “St.W” is a printing typo. Apparently, the printer got a handwritten list of weapons for the order blank and saw “S+W” and thought it meant “StW” and made an error when he cast the type. That’s just my opinion based on my Jr. High School experience in print shop. It’s an easy mistake to make.

Because of this typo, you would have thought that the FBI could have tracked down what publication it had come from.
They didn’t.

Another point about this order blank is that it explicitly states that the requirement for a C.O.D. ( cash on delivery ) order is a deposit of 1/2 the price of the item. ( underlined in red, above )

Ten dollars is not 1/2 of thirty.

Express charges collect

The order blank also informs the purchaser that the “express charges collect” ( yellow underline above ). This means that any shipping charges would have to be paid by the purchaser at the time of delivery.
That’s in addition to the $ 19.95 balance on the weapon and the C.O.D. charges.

The balance owed on the item and the C.O.D. charges would be collected by REA and paid to Seaport Traders. The express charges would be paid to REA Express when the package was picked up.

But the documents in evidence show NO express charges.
Did they ship the revolver free of charge ?

Or was this form filled out after March 1963 by someone other than REA Express, someone who might not have known what the express charges would have been ?

If this were a legitimate document generated by REA Express, the express charges should have been displayed on the document.

Another thing I find odd about this order blank is that it contains two different Commission Exhibit numbers, CE 790 ( above ) and CE 135 ( below ).

The Commission’s “Expert”

As it did in the shipping of the rifle, the Commission failed to hear testimony from the person responsible for shipping the weapon.

Instead, it chose for its expert another office manager, Heinz Michaelis, who did not work for Seaport Traders but instead worked for their mail order management company called Merchanteers. ( 7 H 373 ) In addition, Michaelis was not in the office manager’s position at the time of this transaction. ( 7 H 375 ) He didn’t take over his office duties until September-October, 1963, when the woman who was doing the job left. ( ibid. )

Mr BALL. So you have no personal knowledge, then, of the transaction by which the gun was shipped and sold ?
Mr. MICHAELIS Not prior to the first investigation. ( 7 H 376 )

So Michaelis had no idea about this transaction until he was approached by the FBI on November 30, 1963.
But there WAS someone who did and she was the person who handled it.
Her name was Emma Vaughn. ( ibid. )
You won’t find her name anywhere in the 26 volumes except in the testimony of Heinz Michaelis.
Not only was she never called to testify, she was never even interviewed by the FBI.

My Observations

It seems to me that in the course of an investigation, you would want to interview the person responsible for doing the shipping to explain the process and verify that the documentation is the documentation they provided with the order.

But the Commission didn’t do that. Instead, they had someone who didn’t even handle the Seaport Traders account until later that year to explain what their records showed.

Michaelis was not only used to testify about the documents from Seaport Traders, he was used to testify about the paperwork from REA Express, for whom he did not work.
Michaelis couldn’t testify to anything that was specifically related to that transaction, only to that which was process-related and what the paperwork showed.

Shipping the Revolver

In 1963, concealable firearms could only be shipped through the US Post Office if the recipient were a military officer, national guard officer, a law enforcement officer, an officer of an armed security service or the purchasing agent thereof, or a gun manufacturer or dealer.

Any recipient who did not fall into this category had to receive his concealable weapon through a private freight company.
The main freight company in the US in 1963 was REA Express, recognizable by their green and red trucks.

Also in 1963, freight companies would not deliver C.O.D. packages to post office boxes. Instead, they would keep the package at their facility and send a notice to the post office box that the package had arrived. Then the recipient would go to their facility with the notice and form of picture ID and pay the outstanding amount in order to receive their package.
This would insure that all charges would be paid in full.

Receiving the Revolver

Just as it had failed to prove that Oswald received the rifle from the Dallas Post Office, the FBI failed to prove that Oswald received the handgun from REA Express.

In fact, no one from REA Express was ever interviewed by the FBI. No questions were asked about their procedures regarding the handling of handguns or of C.O.D. shipments.
No REA employee was ever identified as having handled the transaction that put the alleged Tippit murder weapon in the hands of Tippit’s alleged killer.

Because the Commission worked from Seaport Traders’ copies of the REA paperwork, someone from REA Express should have been asked to authenticate and/or verify the documents in evidence. That was not done.

In addition, the FBI provided no evidence that the REA Express office ever sent a notification card to Box 2915. It provided no receipt that the balance, the COD charges and the shipping charges for the package had been paid in full.

It provided no identification of the person who picked the package up.
And the FBI could have obtained the bank records of REA and Seaport Traders to show payment was received by REA and made to Seaport.

But they didn’t do that.

In summary, no evidence was ever produced to prove Oswald took possession of the revolver. No paperwork regarding the handgun was ever found among Oswald’s possessions.