§338-18 Disclosure of records…
(g) The department shall not issue a verification in lieu of a certified copy of any such record, or any part thereof, unless it is satisfied that the applicant requesting a verification is: …
(4) A private or government attorney who seeks to confirm information about a vital event relating to any such record which was acquired during the course of for purposes of legal proceedings;
Orly Taitz submitted a copy of Obama’s Long Form Birth Certificate in the Mississippi case of Taitz v. Democrat Party of Mississippi, and when the defense submitted a more legible copy for the record, Taitz demanded sanctions for their asking the court to take judicial notice of a fraudulent document. While the defense never asked the Court to take judicial notice of the certificate, in their defense they nevertheless asked the State of Hawaii to confirm the authenticity of what they and Taitz submitted, under the statute cited above, and have now submitted Hawaii’s original paper documentary response with signature and seal to the Court.
What counsel for the Mississippi Democratic Executive Committee submitted is very similar to the document provided by Hawaii to State of Arizona Secretary of State Ken Bennett. The difference, besides the full-color copy included in the documentation, is the fact that this verification, described by the defense as “self-authenticating,” is now before a federal district court.
Attorneys Begley and Tepper wrote:
The Hawaii Verification, which (a) contains the seal of the Hawaii State Department of Health (an agency of a state of the United States), and (b) was executed via signature and initials by Dr. Onaka, is self-authenticating pursuant to Fed. R. Evid. 902. Moreover, the Hawaii DOH Verification is not subject to the hearsay rule pursuant to Fed. R. Evid. 803 (9). That Dr. Onaka is the Hawaii State Registrar with authority to provide information regarding vital records on file with the Hawaii Department of Health is an undisputed fact.
The Hawaii verification provides official confirmation that the “information” – i.e., each and every vital fact of President Obama’s birth stated in the LFBC posted at whitehouse.gov – is the same information contained in his original LFBC on file with the [D]epartment. As such, the Hawaii Verification – with under Haw. Rev. Stat. § 338-14.3 (b) “shall be considered for all purposes certification that the vital event did occur and the facts of the event are as stated by the application” – clearly establishes the veracity of the LFBC posted at whitehouse.gov and confirms that no fraud occurred either in the posting of the document on whitehouse.gov or in MDEC Counsel’s submission of a copy of the LFBC as an exhibit in these proceedings.
Anyone with the ability to read knows that the Hawaii Department of Health has verified the place of President Obama’s birth over and over again, starting in 2008, and in that sense nothing is new. Still this is the first time an official verification is before a court hearing an Obama eligibility case and it means that in every future birther lawsuit calling into question Obama’s place of birth the defense can request this same verification from Hawaii, or at least request judicial notice of its being provided already in Mississippi federal court. Birthers can claim the White House faked the document, but a similar claim against a state agency is going to fall flat in a court of law.
Maybe it’s time for the referee to blow the whistle for “piling on.”