hmmmmm....not sure I get the big fuss about ‘amended’ in the statute and what was in the actual press releases and email exchanges. The woman didn’t say that Obama’s BC was ‘amended’. I’m confused....lol.
I’m totally speculating here .. but it appears the gist of the question was .. and likely for the first time in their ongoing correspondence .. the concept of the possibility of there being an ‘amended’ bc, so TerriK raised the issue.
I’m speculating that since there are such documents as in adoptions, it was her method of seeking another bit of information, another clue .. and if they would respond either in the positive or negative, it would impart another thread in the tapestry of facts.
~~~
“From: [TerriK - real name and email redacted]
Date: July 27, 2009 7:20:20 AM EDT
To: janice.okubo@doh.hawaii.gov
Subject: Your help is appreciated.
Dear Ms. Okubo,
Can the State of Hawaii verify that they have the Amended (Original) birth record for President Barack Obama on file in accordance with state policies, whether digital, paper or otherwise?
Thank you and I apologize for your trouble in asking–I can’t imagine how this issue must be overwhelming you. You have been extremely patient and professional from what I can discern. But, I feel the best thing for me, is just to ask you guys myself.
Thank you again…
~~~~
Whereupon the scripted press release rely was the response.
[snip]
OIP STAFF ATTORNEY LINDEN JOESTING ISSUED MULTIPLE CONFIRMATIONS THAT THE DoH WAS REQUIRED TO INFORM TerriK IF THEY DID NOT MAINTAIN THE RECORDS SHE REQUESTED.
[snip]
But the DoH never said that amended records didn’t exist in their files. They did, however, deny access to those records and that means the records must be in their possession.
[snip]
Part 2 of the TerriK investigation report concludes with Joestling’s official OIP response to TerriK’s appeal:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/bloggers/2345143/posts?page=465#465