2011
10.31

I received a package last week. Strange thing is, there are a number of indications that something is fishy.

1. The oversized envelope was ripped open and had been taped up. (This has happened to every package I have received in the last 5 years.)

2. The package was improperly hand addressed – wrong street name.

3. There was no return address label or indication of the sender of the package.

4. The typed letter inside was addressed to a different name than was on the envelope.
– My name was correctly spelled on the envelope (handwritten). Terance. This is odd because you would expect the envelope to have been addressed by copying from the letter.
– The letter was addressed to Thomas.
– My correct name is on each and every one of the fifteen additional documents included in the package.

5. The letter was written on October 12, 2011. The package was mailed on October 19, 2011 a full week later. As there was little care to the packaging or addressing, would it take a week from desk to mailroom?

6. When using that type of mailing label for postage, the postage may be post dated 7 days in advance. The package must be posted on the date on the label.

7. The letter refers to a File No. which is not included.

8. The letter is not signed by an identifiable signature.

9. The letter includes a non-working phone number to contact with questions.

10. When the department referenced in the letter was contacted it was indicated they had no knowledge of the document or the package.

11. The referenced department also additionally indicated they would not have handled the document, it would have been forwarded to another office.

12. The zip code that the document was posted from is correct, but not from the office which would have handled the issue.

13. The documents included were ones which I had hand delivered on March 17, 2011. There was no reason to return the documents to me. They were copies.

14. When I contacted the department about the letter and the documents, it was suggested I take everything to the FBI office in Fort Washington, PA to be evaluated.

15. The letterhead used for the letter inside was from the FBI in Philadelphia.

16. The documents were the ones I had delivered on March 17, 2011 to the FBI Philadelphia.

17. The person I spoke to was an FBI agent. (Whom I promised never to name on this blog. Promise kept.)

18. The person I spoke to was also the person I referenced in a previous post regarding surveillance.

There are so many anomalies with this package that it is difficult to believe the veracity of the package. I am working an angle on finding out the sender, but unfortunately I am too afraid to take it to the FBI alone.

The FBI has never returned any other documents provided. I believe the private investigator involved is comprised of former FBI agents. I believe someone at the FBI is covering up for the breach caused by their former employees who know the departments tactics – and they may have compromised the FBI investigative abilities by pretending to be the FBI.

The metered mailing label includes an indicia.

Each “indicium” or “indicia” is completely unique and includes information about delivery and who mailed the mailpiece. Because the indicium carries information about who created the indicium, the USPS should be able to trace the indicium to the creator and identify them.

No Comment.

Add Your Comment

%d bloggers like this: