No, she’s saying that the microfilm readers at the HI libraries allow you to make paper copies of what is being viewed. So she had copies of what was on the microfilms.
The copies made at different times showed that these microfilms supposedly LOST scratches over time...
NO, I think what we are getting at is the contention that the student in Sweden was somehow able to insert a full page of the Honolulu paper into the microfilm record. And I simply can’t buy that. It’s far more likely that some smart little wag was trying to muddy the record and send us on a wild-goose chase.
If the microfilm contained the birth notice, and it showed in both the Hawaii library and the Library of Congress, (If I’m reading that report correctly) then that’s where it was, scratches or not.
However - announcement or not, the sequence of events as I see them, caused the obliteration of the original Sunahara record, and required that a COLB be prepared for her to allow her to be buried as Virginia. When was her funeral?
Septemper 28, 1961.
It’s an interesting situation, my observations would result in the appearance of a birth announcement, whereas the contention that the announcements are fakes, requires that the microfilms at the Honolulu library and the Library of Congress, be inserted into the microfilm record 50 years after the event.
Which might be more likely given that the motive for the deception appears to have been to give an unidentified child an ID?