We do know. I hate to cite Orly because she purposely sabotages her own efforts, but she did file court orders in Hawaii to compel production of Obama's birth record and the DOH refused.
In a letter to Taitz, Deputy Attorney General Jill Nagamine wrote the following: "You are seeking disclosure of privileged or other protected matter, and there is no exception that applies to allow disclosure to you."
Where's that full faith and credit thing you were talking about??
Hawaii already prepared a Letter of Verification that is now an exhibit for a federal judge in Mississippi for the Obama long form birth certificate. It will be up to Judge Wingate in Jackson, Mississippi to decide whether he thinks the Obama birth certificate should receive full faith and credit or not.
Right, and why didn't Obama just submit one of his two hard copies instead of forcing Mississippi to request a letter of verification that doesn't say anything?? Why is it taking so long for Judge Wingate to decide??
The Alabama Supreme Court also has a copy of the long form submitted in an amicus brief from the Alabama Democratic Party.
An actual certified copy?? Photocopies don't qualify for full faith and credit when the actual record is supposed to be certified.
Judge Wingate in federal court in Jackson, Mississippi is in possession of a certified Hawaii Letter of Verification and two copies of the Obama long form, one from the plaintiff alleging forgery and one from the defense alleging that it is original, valid and accurate. Judge Wingate has had those exhibits as evidence for more than a year now but he still isn’t ready to rule one wy or the other.
So what exactly is your point?? Wingate doesn't have a certified copy of the actual birth record and the letter of verification isn't a full verification. It's no surprise a decision hasn't been rendered. Perhaps he's waiting till Obama is out of office so the issue is moot??
Orly Taitz is not a judge nor was she ever given a court order from a judge. She is not authorized to issue court orders. Hawaii is under no obligation to honor her requests since she does not fit in any of the categories that the Hawaii statute pertains to.
Deputy Attorney General Jill Nagamine was exactly right and Hawaii courts backed up Nagamine’s position with actual court rulings.
The whitehouse.gov PDF image is just a digitized version of the copies that Hawaii provided to Obama. As long as the data is the same, which generation copy is used is irrelevant. If Judge Wingate want a first generation copy or if he would like to inspect the original, he can issue a court order.
Federal Rule of Evidence #1005 covers use of copies to prove content:
“The proponent may use a copy to prove the content of an official record — or of a document that was recorded or filed in a public office as authorized by law — if these conditions are met: the record or document is otherwise admissible; and the copy is certified as correct in accordance with Rule 902(4) or is testified to be correct by a witness who has compared it with the original. If no such copy can be obtained by reasonable diligence, then the proponent may use other evidence to prove the content.”
http://www.law.cornell.edu/rules/fre/rule_1005
It will be up to Judge Wingate and the Alabama Supreme Court to decide on the probative value of the evidence that is before them.