Maybe she should get her statement notarized, as according to this, she probably viewed the records as part of a lawsuit preparation:
http://www.pr-inside.com/hawai-i-health-director-dr-chiyome-fukino-r893490.htm
“A Hawai’i COLB is only one piece of paper in a complicated evidentiary inquiry involving Obama. No one outside two people from the Hawai’i Department of Health has apparently viewed the original 1961 document. Neither of them has any forensic or legal experience. Health Director Chiyome Fukino is a medical doctor.
She probably dug out the original COLB because the Attorney General of Hawai’i asked her to. Does that make sense? Absolutely it does. After all, his office has to appear at a court hearing in two weeks and respond to my lawsuit. That is the way lawsuits progress. Lawyers (AG) consult clients (DofH) and ask for evidence to prepare for court.”
There are only two ways her testimony means anything at all. One is a notarized document of testimony, the other is her verbal testimony, UNDER OATH, at a court proceeding. Outside of those two cases, anything she says means exactly nothing. I’d make a small wager that if she were asked to do such a notarized document that you would see more backpedalling than a land-stranded crawfish.