Replies

Methinks no one has ever seen either the microfilm or microfilch. When the forged COLB was shown...they knew the next thing they would need is a birth announcement, so...they created one.

And a very helpful attendant at the library just happened to have what they wanted - available in her folder. She scanned what she had and e-mailed it. So simple.

As I've said before, a telephone call by Madelyn Dunham to both of these newspapers, or a personal appearance at them, was all that would have needed to get these birth announcements published in 1961. However, there is also a better than even probability that the original microfilm was replaced with microfilm taken of a forged newspaper printout. I don't think that the microfilm was spliced because the type and typesetting is also off. I've explored all sides of the birth announcement debate, and my conclusion still comes down to “Big Woof!!!” THAT being said, however, the sudden "revelation" of this birth announcement, after questions about the autheticity of ZERO's COLB had been raised, and one which has a false address, coupled with the fact that no birth announcement for the Nordyke twins appears anywhere in either paper, is enough to warrant its own investigation. Anyone who insists that these birth announcements could ONLY have come directly from Vital Records and nowhere else is either ignorant of the ways things are actually done, or is deliberately lying. I spoke with the editors of both papers. I spoke with the Head of Vital Records. All of them confirmed that family members were ALWAYS permitted to submit birth announcements directly to the newspaper, and that they were NEVER crosschecked with official Vital Records. The reason is, "Why?" There is absolutely no need to verify them. A birth announcment is not a legal document and cannot be used in any probative way. It is a total nonissue in comparison to fabricating a government-issued birth certificate. You can go to jail for doing that, but there’s no penalty for placing a false birth announcement. It is not a case of false advertising. It is not identity theft. But, even a child can see the connection between the less-than-authentic BC and this less-than-authentic birth announcement.