Quote from tmarket:
Out of State (US) births would not have been recorded as being born in the city of Honolulu.
jem, I can see that you will never believe anything you don't agree with, and that is fine. There is no possible way for a baby or child to be observed 24 hr a day from birth to adult, so it is possible that somebody could have swapped a native born baby with a foreign baby, if the parents are in part of the conspiracy. In addition, it is possible that birth certificates on state records could be swapped, altered or fabricated. So in that sense NO ONE who has ever been elected president of the US can be proven definitively to have been born in the US.
Where did you get it? How do you know it is contains reliable data? how do you know anything about the recording of the place of birth.
The federal rules of evidence are good place to start.
In the end the point of the Rules of evidence is to allow the trier of fact to examine and weigh trustworthy evidence.
from the federal rules of evidence - exception to hearsay rule 803.
(states evidence codes are going to be substantially similar.)
(6) Records of regularly conducted activity. A memorandum, report, record, or data compilation, in any form, of acts, events, conditions, opinions, or diagnoses, made at or near the time by, or from information transmitted by, a person with knowledge, if kept in the course of a regularly conducted business activity, and if it was the regular practice of that business activity to make the memorandum, report, record or data compilation, all as shown by the testimony of the custodian or other qualified witness, or by certification that complies with Rule 902(11), Rule 902(12), or a statute permitting certification, unless the source of information or the method or circumstances of preparation indicate lack of trustworthiness. The term "business" as used in this paragraph includes business, institution, association, profession, occupation, and calling of every kind, whether or not conducted for profit.
I submit if this matter was tested by the rules of evidence
a judge would get to the bottom of this question by inquiring about the existence of data recorded or transmitted to the recorder by doctors or staff reports the birth of children in the hospital. The records contemporaneous with the birth would be the decisive evidence.
All this other stuff is bullshit.
If the original data does not exist - let the record reflect a diligent search for it happened. Then the admissibility and reliability of the weaker evidence would be considered.
In short if you tried to produce the document you posted here. A judge would want to know if it is trustworthy. If you were to establish that record as an officially certified record delivered to the court from the custodian in a proper manner. You would still run into and objection as to whether there is a better record.
That record would be a birth record recorded at the time of birth by people whose job it was to make the record.
