For the ‘good of the child’ state functions will bend the details. In this case it probably gave a child ‘legitimate’ and named father - even if a farce.
Big BHO was long gone from Hawaii and likely (at the time) to never return. The divorce documents show a ‘one-way’ divorce. All done in Hawaii. ATTEMPTED communication wall over mail. Big BHO never signed anything or acknowledged the proceeding in any way. The records have a registered or certified mail receipt (not sure which off top of the head). It shows the papers were delivered. I think I saw somewhere this would have been a ‘knock and nail’ type summons of request. After so many days or period of time with no response. Judge grants ‘divorce’ and walla - Baby has a father he probably did not have before. Mother is now a ‘divorced single mom’ instead of an ‘unmarried single mom’ and all is then well. No society stigmas on either mother or child going forward. Who cares if she was never really married to Big BHO....he is a foreign national with a history of ‘playboy ways’ and no one probably cared if he really was the father or not - it fixed the family gaps for SAD and child.
This may have even been the first point where Hawaii CREATED BHO II’s legal identity. Regardless of where the baby was born (Kenya, Washington, Canada, Mars, etc.), and regardless of who the original father was or was not, Hawaii probably did their thing in issuing a Hawaii BC so that it showed SAD and Big BHO as the parents. Establishing birth and US Citizenship for the baby - regardless of the baby’s actual past.
What would be confusing about this scenario though is why would they need to ‘steal’ someone else BC #. If this happened this way then Hawaii should have issued an official certificate with an official BC #. Maybe that document was changed again in later marriages, adoptions, divorces, etc. and the forgers do not know what the original number was even if it exist.
Very astute analysis.
Think about it. What if she wasn't his mother? With that divorce, she got custody of an unidentified child, he got a name and a birthdate.
If SAD was the mother, and he was born in HI, no matter what about original lack of father or added father, the foreger/s would not needed to have done an entire made up document. They would have taken the original doc and just changed the father. But the entire thing is forged (and really badly). So the rational conclusion is that nothing on the forged document is on his original birth certificate, so they had to make up an entirely fake one to fit the myth.