Actually, I think it's also required under the normal disclosure statutes where they have to release any part of any certificate to an eligible requester.
And yes, you're absolutely right about all their parsing. It would be comical if it wasn't so incriminating. The only way I see Hawaii really breaking down and releasing the things you mention is if someone internal blows the whistle on 'em.
Corsi says he already has an informant from inside the HDOH, though - who reported when the forgery was placed in the files. Somehow there has to be a procedure whereby such a thing makes a legal difference.
Would it have to be a criminal trial? If a state prosecutor charged HDOH officials with crimes using that witness as their evidence, would they have to be granted discovery such as the transaction logs, depositions, and microfilms? Could HI officials refuse to provide evidence to law enforcement because they were from another state? Would law enforcement have to get a search warrant rather than use a subpoena? And if so, could the HI judge just refuse to issue a search warrant?
I don’t understand how all that works.