The current one doesn’t because it’s not in a book anymore - the records have long been computerised. I cannot recall if my older copies referenced a book or not - I’m inclined to think it didn’t, because I can’t remember anything being ‘filled in’ in that section. But I cannot recall.
I’m no troll. I’d be delighted if the Kenyan birth certificate is real. But it does look to me like somebody has tried to create a fake Kenyan birth certificate based on an Australian template (whether Bomford’s certificate or not) for their own purposes and the dogged pursuit of evidence that proves to be fake will just make it easier for any and all evidence to be discredited whether fake or not.
I don’t mean to be rude, but have you noticed that both the Kenyan doc and the Bomford doc do in fact have the identical
book 44B and page 5573 ?
And your telling me you can’t recall whether or not any aussie birth doc ever mentioned a book and a page. That’s cool.
I would think that it’s pretty important.
Everyone pretty much agrees that either the Kenyan doc was copied off the Aussie doc or the Aussie doc was copied off the Kenyan doc.
And you’re saying that the Aussies might not even use a book page system?
Well. It’s pretty clear then that the Aussie doc was copied off the Kenyan doc.
(Unless those Aussie docs with book and page can be “found”)
I'd have to agree with you. To me the Bomford image shows every sign of being genuine, and the Kenya one a fake.
It looks to me like someone got a form from elsewhere, but also looked at the Bomford certificate and pulled the data from that.