“Otherwise provided by law” - would that be, for instance, the state laws which say that a birth certificate is only probative if it has the raised seal and certifying statement? Or the Act of Congress which codified the Full Faith and Credit Clause of the US Constitution by saying that one state is required to accept the acts and records of another state when those acts and records are submitted having the certifying statement and raised seal to prove their genuineness?
So that if a document was submitted without those things the law would require them to be REJECTED as non-genuine.
IOW, vital records are required by LAW to be genuinely certified in order to be probative. Where there isn’t a law about it - say, for instance, if you were talking about evidence regarding forgery, somebody failing e-verify, somebody actually refusing to appear in court as ordered and submit to that court a record they claimed they had 2 certified copies of.... that kind of stuff would go under the “preponderance of the evidence” rule. Which Malihi didn’t obey, because he simply ignored all that stuff.
But the one thing hewas REQUIRED BY LAW to reject was a non-certified vital record. And that is what he presumed to be true.
Bass-ackwards.
And extremely DANGEROUS.
A seal merely makes a BC self authenticating. It can be authenticated by other means OR all parties can stipulate as to its authenticity.
Look at the Georgia laws of evidence - the word probative is not as precise as you would make it out to be.
You keep make a lot of absolute statements as to what is required. I think it is time you actually backed up your statements with some links to actual laws.