Here's what HRS 338-17 says:
§338-17 Late or altered certificate as evidence. The probative value of a “late” or “altered” certificate shall be determined by the judicial or administrative body or official before whom the certificate is offered as evidence. [L 1949, c 327, §21; RL 1955, §57-20; HRS §338-17; am L 1997, c 305, §4]
First, you're assuming that Obama's birth certificate has been altered. Second, the statement at the bottom of Obama's ColB says that it is prima facie evidence
The HDOH has admitted - several times and repeatedly - that Obama’s BC is amended.
And the prima facie statement only says that it is prima facie evidence of birth. The very fact that Obama is alive is evidence of birth.
As far as I can tell from the HDOH, they make no distinction in their index record reporting and the prima facie note on the COLB between certificates that mean something legally and those which are mere hearsay. That’s why all Obama and the HDOH will allow is index data. I asked to see the delayed birth index data for Obama. They refused. I asked to see the “pending” birth index for Obama. They refused.
So the only way to know the legal status of the BC’s they have index data for is to see a non-certified abbreviated certificate (COLB) - which the rules say anyone can receive. The legal status of the BC is not supposed to be secret at all.
But of course, the HDOH refuses to follow their rules and send me a non-certified abbreviated copy for Obama so I can see the legal status (which would be only shown by the presence or absence of the note of either alteration or late filing - both of which should be on Obama’s BC, both of which render the BC legally non-conclusive, and both of which are missing from the Factcheck COLB). Mere index data tells us nothing about the evidentiary and/or legal status of what Hawaii has.
> Here’s what HRS 338-17 says:
>
>§338-17 Late or altered certificate as evidence. The probative value of a “late” or “altered” certificate shall be determined by the judicial or administrative body or official before whom the certificate is offered as evidence. [L 1949, c 327, §21; RL 1955, §57-20; HRS §338-17; am L 1997, c 305, §4]
>
>First, you’re assuming that Obama’s birth certificate has been altered. Second, the statement at the bottom of Obama’s ColB says that it is prima facie evidence
Concerning the statement at the bottom; do you think that intrinsically makes the document accurate? That is to say, which has more legal authority/power, an official document or a state statute?
To illustrate, let me show a conflict in two legal documents; my state Constitution and a State Statute. The Constitution says:
No law shall abridge the right of the citizen to keep and bear arms for security and defense, for lawful hunting and recreational use and for other lawful purposes, but nothing herein shall be held to permit the carrying of concealed weapons. No municipality or county shall regulate, in any way, an incident of the right to keep and bear arms.
One, of several violating State Statutes is:
30-7-2.4. Unlawful carrying of a firearm on university premises; notice; penalty.
A. Unlawful carrying of a firearm on university premises consists of carrying a firearm on university premises except by:
(1) a peace officer;
(2) university security personnel;
(3) a student, instructor or other university-authorized personnel who are engaged in army, navy, marine corps or air force reserve officer training corps programs or a state-authorized hunter safety training program;
(4) a person conducting or participating in a university-approved program, class or other activity involving the carrying of a firearm; or
(5) a person older than nineteen years of age on university premises in a private automobile or other private means of conveyance, for lawful protection of the person’s or another’s person or property.
B. A university shall conspicuously post notices on university premises that state that it is unlawful to carry a firearm on university premises.
C. As used in this section:
(1) “university” means a baccalaureate degree-granting post-secondary educational institution, a community college, a branch community college, a technical-vocational institute and an area vocational school; and
(2) “university premises” means:
(a) the buildings and grounds of a university, including playing fields and parking areas of a university, in or on which university or university-related activities are conducted; or
(b) any other public buildings or grounds, including playing fields and parking areas that are not university property, in or on which university-related and sanctioned activities are performed.
D. Whoever commits unlawful carrying of a firearm on university premises is guilty of a petty misdemeanor.
As you can see, this is obviously a law abridging the tight of the citizen to keep and bear arms for security and defense.