(PART 995)



The FBI traced the sale of the 40" C2766 rifle found in the TSBD backward and claimed that it was a part of a shipment of 100 rifles weighing 750 lbs. that was sent to Klein's from Crescent Firearms in February, 1963.

But that shipment was a shipment of 36" rifles.

In researching for her excellent article on the Oswald rifle, JFK assassination researcher Martha Moyer checked on wooden shipping containers used in transporting weapons, and found that all the containers weighed between 16 and 20 pounds. The 36-inch weapon allegedly ordered by "Hidell" was advertised as weighing 5 1/2 pounds.

The total weight of 100 such weapons would be 550 pounds. Added to the weight range of ten wooden shipping containers, the result would be a total of between 710 and 750 pounds.

The delivery receipt from Lifschultz Fast Freight listed the freight as 10 crates/cartons of guns/rifles and listed the weight at 750 lbs.:


Had the shipment been of the 40" rifles, at 7 lbs. each, the total weight including 160-200 lbs. for the crates would have been in the 860-900 lb. range.

Instead, the 750 lbs. gross weight is entirely consistent of shipment of 10 crates at 20 lbs each (200) and 100 rifles at 5.5 lbs. each (550).

In other words, the shipment received by Klein's in February, 1963 was indeed a shipment of 36-inch weapons and did NOT include the 40.2-inch rifle that was removed from the TSBD.


There's a second issue raised by this documentation and that is that there was a 40.2" rifle removed from the TSBD with serial number C2766 and that there was another, a 36" rifle with the same C2766 serial number that was a part of that February '63 shipment of 100 36" rifles to Klein's.

Waldman Exhibit 4 is a control list of the 36" rifles in that Feb. '63 shipment and their serial numbers.

Look at line 836:


That pretty much destroys the BS story that no two 6.5 rifles had the same serial number. There was one 36" and one 40.2".

That's at least two.


Only a total idiot could not figure this out.

But Gil Jesus wants desperately to believe that EVERY single gun in the February 1963 shipment to Klein's HAD TO BE a 36-inch rifle. But such an assumption is nonsense in view of Line 836 in Waldman Exhibit No. 4, plus Line 3 of the document on the left-hand side of Waldman Exhibit No. 3.

Both of those Waldman exhibits (No. 3 and No. 4) indicate that the rifle that Klein's ultimately ended up shipping to Oswald/"Hidell" on 3/20/63 (Serial No. C2766) was included as a part of that February '63 shipment of rifles from Crescent Firearms to Klein's Sporting Goods.

And since we know that C2766 is a 40-inch gun, it means that at least one 40-inch Carcano made its way into that Klein's shipment of 100 rifles in February of '63.

And, to date, there hasn't been a single person on the planet who has been able to prove that there was more than one Mannlicher-Carcano rifle with the serial number of C2766 on it.

In fact, as far as I am aware, there hasn't been a single person on this planet who has come up with two MC rifles that have the same serial number--PERIOD--whether it be C2766 or ANY other serial number.

And that's very likely because there are no two MC rifles with the exact same serial number affixed to them. Hence the reason to stamp products with SERIAL NUMBERS in the first place -- to make them UNIQUE and DIFFERENT from one another for IDENTIFICATION purposes (as indicated by the literal definition of the term "Serial Number"; see the definitions below).

SERIAL NUMBER (Merriam-Webster definition) -- "A number indicating place in a series and used as a means of identification."

SERIAL NUMBER (Wikipedia's 2010 definition) -- "...A unique number assigned for identification which varies from its successor or predecessor by a fixed discrete integer value."

SERIAL NUMBER (Wikipedia's 2015 definition) -- "A unique code assigned to uniquely identify an item."


What happens to this conjecture when you [Gil Jesus] actually do some research and find out that the 36" rifle weighs over six and a half pounds?


Conjecture ? I'm going by the documentation in YOUR evidence....ya know, the evidence you support. There's no conjecture there.

Care to tell us how 100 -- 6 1/2 lb rifles get shipped with a total gross weight of 750 lbs.?

Care to show us the 10 wooden rifle crates from that shipment that had to have weighed 10 lbs. each?


Yah retard, pure conjecture. What did the box that Klein's used to ship the rifles weigh, retard?

What does a 36" carcano weigh, retard?

Are you are stupid enough to think that it is established fact that the 36" Carcano weighs 5.5 pounds just because the Klein's ad says so?

Did the WC say the 36" rifle weighs 5.5 pounds?

I don't have to show anything. I was just pointing out that you had the basics wrong. How can your conclusions be correct when you have no idea what a 36" Carcano weighs?


We know Oswald ordered and received a 40" rifle because that is what the evidence shows. How many ninjas and backflips are needed for the retard version of what is in evidence?


To repeat:

Nobody on the planet (to my knowledge) has ever come up with another Mannlicher-Carcano 91/38 rifle with the serial number C2766 on it.

BTW, Gil, what makes you think that every single gun in the February 1963 shipment of 100 rifles that was sent from Crescent Firearms to Klein's Sporting Goods had to be a 36-inch gun?

Where on this Lifschultz Fast Freight shipping invoice (Waldman Exhibit #2) does it say anything about only "36-inch" Carcanos being contained within this 750-pound shipment of 100 rifles?

The only thing the Lifschultz document says under "Number of packages and description" is this -- "10 CR OR CS GUNS OR RIFLES".


Gil, no one in their right mind is going to accept that nitpicking nonsense like this outweighs the fact that Oswald is shown holding the same rifle that was taken out of the TSBD that bears the serial number C2766.

The VERY SAME numbered rifle that was sent to his PO Box.

Your weights and measures nonsense hardly outweighs the fact that C2766 has Oswald's fingerprints all over it as well, LOL!

Has JFK-CT research now descended to refutation of the bleeding obvious, like no one saw Oswald pick up his rifle at the PO so he must never have got it, no one remembers Oswald crossing the Mexican border so he must never have crossed it, etc etc?

Must play well on Black Op radio, Gil. When is your next appearance?


We're still waiting for them [the LNers] to produce the evidence that the shipment included different length rifles, rather than all the same size.

So far, all we've gotten is their "explanations" and not very good ones at that.

We're waiting for their EVIDENCE and we're probably going to be waiting a long while.


Who said it was different length rifles? The paperwork indicates the whole shipment of a hundred rifles were the 40" model.

Interesting that Oswald got a superior weapon, had he got the rifle in the ad, he might have missed.


I think Bud is absolutely correct (based on the combination of these two documents -- Waldman Exhibit No. 1 and Waldman Exhibit No. 5).

In Waldman #1, it says that there's a change in the pricing of the MC rifles that Crescent Firearms will be shipping to Klein's starting on 4/13/62, with the price increasing by $1.00 per rifle (from $7.50 per gun to $8.50), with the higher-priced rifle being the exact type of gun shipped to Oswald/Hidell -- the M91/38 model.

And Waldman #5 says the total price for the 100 rifles in the February '63 shipment from Crescent to Klein's is $850.00 -- which quite obviously indicates that that entire shipment of 100 rifles consisted of the M91/38 model, the exact model that we know Klein's sent to Oswald in March '63.

However, there is a 36-inch variant of the 91/38 rifle, in addition to the 40-inch version that Klein's shipped to Oswald. So whether or not every single gun in the Feb. '63 shipment was a 40-inch model cannot be definitely determined by just looking at Waldman Exhibit #1 alone.

But we certainly know that Rifle C2766 was a 40-inch gun, and we also know from additional paperwork that C2766 was included in that Feb. '63 shipment.


I found the above information regarding the weights of various Mannlicher-Carcano rifles. And according to the chart on the webpage linked above, there is no Carcano rifle that weighs less than 6 lbs, 6 ozs.

Based also on information gleaned from the above-linked chart, the 750-pound weight of the shipment of 100 guns that was received by Klein's in Feb. '63 seems to be just about right too, because each M91/38 rifle weighs about 7 pounds.

7 lbs. x 100 guns = 700 pounds.

Add in the weight of the packaging materials, etc., and the figure of 750 total pounds as seen in the Lifschultz Fast Freight shipping receipt (Waldman Ex. #2) seems about right for 100 of the 40-inch MC rifles.


Problem with that is that Oswald had the Fucile Corto, listed at 7 pounds, 7 ounces (convert the overall length from 101.8 cm to 40.1 inches). A hundred of this rifle would weigh 743.75 pounds, leaving little room for shipping material. I knew this 3-4 days ago. I was trying to coax Gil into some actual research, but he wasn't biting.

There are only five ways that I can see the 100 40" rifles falling under 750 pounds.

One, I have the wrong model rifle, or my math is faulty.

Two, the Carcano site has the wrong weight.

Three, the rifles were shipped in canvas bags.

Four, Lifschultz didn't charge for shipping boxes.

Five, someone was kicking back the guy who weighed the freight to undersize the load.


I think the Lifschultz weight of 750 pounds might very well be an "estimated" weight. It's certainly a nice rounded-off type of number anyway.

There's also the possibility that the 100 rifles in the Feb. '63 shipment contained a mixture of different types of 91/38 Carcano rifles. One of the types of 91/38s weighs only 6 lbs., 6 ozs., and yet another version weighs 7.0 lbs.

I'll also offer up this Warren Commission testimony from Klein's Vice President William Waldman [at 7 H 362]:

DAVID W. BELIN -- "Your receiving department checks each order to see that the physical contents match the stated shipment on the invoice; is that correct?"

WILLIAM J. WALDMAN -- "They don't necessarily see that they match, because they frequently do not match, but they determine actually how much was received by us."

David Von Pein
July 27—August 1, 2010