If she (Orly) only has a computer image of the document then who’s to say that the originally posted image was changed without her notice and that is the one she’s been running with since. The only thing that can be used as a base would be a paper document or how else could these computers images ever be 100% verified??
If all she has is a computer image, she will get laughed out of court - and this thread demonstrates why.
She needs the original doc. No ifs ands or buts.
Any lawyer knows that every document presented in court has to be tagged with an original Bates number to substantiate it as the original document to support the evidence.
I would hope that Orly Taitz does not make a habit of using the world wide web as her back-up source for evidence being submitted to a judge.
Yes - she would get laughed out of court.
" The undersigned counsel for Plaintiffs has acquired possession of a color copy of one certain document (attached as Exhibit A to this motion), regarding which there are no ready means of authentication except by recovery of the original document. As should be apparent from the nature and content of the document, if authenticated, and shown to be genuine, the contents of this document will significantly narrow and shorten the discovery and pre-trial litigation period necessary in this case, and might lead to an early resolution by settlement or transfer of these proceedings to the United States House of Representatives and Senate according the procedures outlined in the Constitution."