Since Australia in 1959 used the same forms as Britain, and Kenya was under the control of Britain until 1963 or 64 then it’s entirely possible that both documents are archived in London in the same book.
The problem I see is the G.F. Lavender and E.F. Lavender.
As well as M.H. Miller and J.H. Miller.
Unless, for some strange reason or quirk of fate, their sons or daughters went to Kenya in 1961 and 1964 and became the ‘Registrar’ and ‘District Registar’.
Possibly? Could be.
Probable? Not likely.
Where did the G.F. Lavender come from...I thought it was K.F. Lavender or E. F. Lavender.
I asked this question a few minutes ago and \had a connection problem, so it may appear twice and if so, I apologize.
Where are these forms generated? In the original country or province?
Or are they drawn up from a master registry in England?
If the latter, then they would be on the same form and if withing Lavendar’s career span, be signed by him.
If they are drawn up in the country of birth, then they must be fake because Lavender is not going to be in both countries.
So where do these docs originate?
Why would someone create a fake Kenyan BC using names and numbers similar to or the same as what they saw on an Australian BC? Why do that?
On that looooong thread someone had found an E.F. Lavender that went to Australia. He was some kind of clerk. How’s your sense of weird? LOL
They are trying to discredit the attorney...with her trial coming up. I’m certainly happy she put this up for authentication. Then again maybe Stanley Ann Dunham had it forged and then gave it to her attorney...who the hack knows.
The problem I see is that many people are treating this as an “analyst the images” computer exercise. I have seen nothing to indicate than ANY poster has knowledge of the registras for the dates and locations on EITHER of these documents. The names may not match either location but that hasn’t been determined.... heck it hasn’t even been determined when the “Republic Of Kenya” was first used. All of these things are facts, they exist and, if acessible, can be verified .
In fact I am more suspicious that there is something to this, with all this chaff there has to be a target here someplace.