The actual name of the FIELD on the BC is “Signature of Parent or Other Informant”. BEnnett requested “Date of signature of parent” which would be a reference to that particular field. So that could have been the signature of Madelyn Dunham on an affidavit dated 8-7, right before she reported the birth to the local registrar the next day.
The attendant swears that the child was born alive on the date and time stated in the certificate. Doesn’t have to be an eyewitness. That might have been the local registrar who signed that, based on the signature of the informant. Which would have made Madelyn think the bases were covered for a HI birth certificate. I wonder what the procedure was for filling out the actual form when a birth was reported by an informant - who would be considered the “attendant”, and whether they would sign something on the BC or in an affidavit.
But they didn’t have a birth weight, which is a REQUIRED item even though it doesn’t show up on a standard long-form. And couldn’t GET a birth weight because neither Stanley Ann nor the baby were in Hawaii. That was probably the snag that Obama had to correct in 2006.
Now that I’m officially talking to myself (lol)...
At http://www.wnd.com/2012/05/arpaio-not-buying-hawaiis-obama-birth-story/ it looks like Sheriff Arpaio is thinking that Hawaii is verifying that Obama was born there. I don’t believe Hawaii even claims to verify that in that “verification”, and I think Mike Zullo realizes that. So Mike and Arpaio need to get together and figure out what that “verification” does and doesn’t mean.
I believe Mike has said that the signature being initialed means it’s not even a legal certification. So it wouldn’t have any legal value even if I was dead wrong on everything I’ve been saying.