In 1963 Lex Cusack found out that JFK had been writing off payments to the Baker estate as legal expenses on his tax returns for previous three years. Cusack then requested letters for his files clarifying that those expenses were not legal expenses in case he someday needed to prove that he, Cusack, did not receive that income. Kennedy then hand wrote letters, dated retroactively, and one for each year, that the expenses were "gifts". Since JFK wrote the letters on the then stationary of the day, the stationary had zipcodes on the letterhead even though the letters were dated 1960 - 1962. Read the letters. They are all abut this topic and each year reads fundamentally the same because each was written at the same time although dated one per year, and isn't it odd that no one has disputed the authenticity of JFK's handwriting on the letters? That's because it is JFK's handwriting which sure seems odd if the letters are "forged", did Lex Jr. forge the letters with JFK's real handwriting. No, the real story is how for the Kennedy family, Democrats, media, and even the mob (who's connection to the Kennedy family is indisputable if the documents are genuine) will go to frame an innocent man (Lex Cusack, Jr) and bamboozle the public in order to maintain the legacy of "Camelot". What a shame.

I also find it very interesting that it seems to be almost impossible to find any images of these documents online. As Bozo Epstein writes, the case for the supposed illegitimacy of the documents is based largely on claims about zip codes and other mechanical issues pertaining to the history of typewriters, none of which seems to bear the burden of proof when it comes to the conclusion of forgery. According to Cusack's lawyer (here: http://www.lawmall.com/jfk.mm/) only seven out of at least 350 documents have had their legitimacy challenged, and the rest have been declared forgeries based on discrepancies in those seven. That is hardly what one would call an airtight case. It seems to me that there is more to this than meets the eye.