lucy:”Why would the grandparents want to “cover up”? That question has to be answered in a way that makes sense to the “reasonable man”.”
As I understand (and have read), there is a question about the address that was given in the newspaper announcements that does not appear to match up to any valid address for the Obama’s or the Stanley’s. This does seem to call into question the validity of the newspaper account.
I think FreeManN is making an assumption that this was not a clerical error but instead was malfeasance on the part of the Stanley family.
The question would be, why is the “incorrect” address given for the birth announcement? Was it an error on the part of the newspaper, the hospital, or was it actually submitted by the family? If it was submitted by the family, why??
Exactly! Why? It isn't enough to assume malfeasance.
“As I understand (and have read), there is a question about the address that was given in the newspaper announcements that does not appear to match up to any valid address for the Obama’s or the Stanley’s. This does seem to call into question the validity of the newspaper account.
I think FreeManN is making an assumption that this was not a clerical error but instead was malfeasance on the part of the Stanley family.
The question would be, why is the “incorrect” address given for the birth announcement? Was it an error on the part of the newspaper, the hospital, or was it actually submitted by the family? If it was submitted by the family, why??”
Well stated, augmented!
And to take the argument just a bit further. Assuming it was NOT a mistake, who would have motive to present an incorrect address to the newspaper re: a fraudulent place and time of birth.
The birth announcement was likely triggered by the filing of the (long form) BC. If the address on the long form BC is the same, and yet it proves to be false, then you have the grandparents and/or parents providing false information to create an appearance of something that was not the case.