The purported birth certificate is a short form cert that is computer generated. Looking at http://forums.myspace.com/t/4220248.aspx?fuseaction=forums.viewthread you can clearly see the date Jun 6, 2007 which to me indicates the copy was computer generated (i.e. printed) on that date. That would also explain Onaka's stamp instead of a real signature. It did not make sense to me until I read Berg's complaint indicating O may have been adopted. Then, following a post at
topix which reads:
All of this would be great except for the fact that Alvin Onaka is the biggest Kotonk (yes he's from the mainland) jerk alive, who has one of the most grievances against him in the whole State system. He is the same arse that won't let people see a photo copy of their original birth certificate that is signed by their parents that used to be given out as well as the computer generated form that now passes for a birth certificate. I guess that the phrase you can fool some of the people all of the time is true.
and there you go... we now have a potentially viable explanation of why an original has not, nor can be, produced.