Under the Federal Rules of Evidence (FRE) certified BC's issued by US states, such as the HI COLB, are considered to be "self-authenticating" in federal court unless challenged. The HI COLB would be granted a hearsay exception and wouldn't require authentication by HI authorities to be entered into evidence in court.
However the FRE requires that certified foreign documents, such as InspectorSmith's CPGH BC, must be authenticated by the authorities of that country if they are to be entered into evidence.
Given the extremely corrupt and dangerous political environment in Kenya where authentication or non-authentication would likely go to the highest bidder, Obama's team would likely easily obtain a rejection of InspectorSmith's CPGH BC as a "fake". Also, a man claiming to be Obama's tribal cousin, Raila Odinga, is Prime Minister of Kenya who is doubtless aware that a Kenya birth for Obama would make him ineligible to be POTUS.
Note that the top national police officer of Kenya was fired and his deputy was demoted four days after Lucas Smith (InspectorSmith) filed his affidavit in Judge Carter's court in CA revealing that he had paid off a guard, most likely a national police officer, to look the other way while he obtained the CPGH BC.
On December 30, 2007, the chairman of the Kenyan election commission declared Raila’s opponent, incumbent president Kibaki, the winner of the presidential election by a margin of about 230,000 votes. Raila has disputed the results, alleging fraud by the election commission but has refused an election petition before the courts. Independent international observers have since stated that the poll was marred by irregularities on both sides, especially at the final vote tallying stages.[1] Many Kenyans across the country rioted against the announced election results.
So Odinga is not president, Kibaki is....
it doesnt matter— if 2 witness stand up in court and say the doc. is real— then obama will have to prove other wise- a witness is the strongest thing in the court of law.. under the treason law i posted earlier, it just takes 2 witnesses to say its real, and thats it
The certified copy of Obama’s BC would not be the same thing as Obama’s lawyers tried to get the judge to take note of (the Factcheck online image). The certified copy would have note of Obama’s amendment - AND the certified copy would require (according to Hawaii law) any judicial or administrative person or body to actually examine the evidence file in order to determine the validity of the claim. Obama’s BC in Hawaii does not qualify as prima facie evidence. If Obama ever presented the certified copy that would immediately be seen - which is probably why he has never done so.
WOW, I missed this tidbit, do you have a link close at hand? I need to add this to my archives.