Sheriff Joe, Deputy Zullo, Jerome “Jerry” Corsi, and other Birthers have been dropping F Bombs left and right since the initial March 12, 2012 press conference. “F” here stands for “Forgery.” On July 17, 2012, Arpaio held another press conference and doubled-down on the forgery claim. Meanwhile, outside the Birther Asylum, and the Anti-Birther Butterfly-Net Shore Patrol, the whole issue is a dud.
The Birther Press is busy chest-thumping like two horny male gorillas about the lack of Main Stream Press coverage, and pouting like little snotty-nosed kids because the Conservative Big Shots, like Rush Limbaugh and Glenn Beck, don’t want to play with them. Maybe it is the whole snot-thing???
Others, like Dr. Orly Taitz, Esq. and numerous Freeper Birfers, are filled with indignation because the saner part of the universe simply ignores Arpaio and the Cold Case Posse’s claims of forgery. Sooo, I have decided to deconstruct the issue and get down to specifics. First, let us get a workable definition of forgery. This one, from the Free Legal Dictionary, seems typical:
The creation of a false written document or alteration of a genuine one, with the intent to defraud.
Forgery consists of filling in blanks on a document containing a genuine signature, or materially altering or erasing an existing instrument. An underlying intent to defraud, based on knowledge of the false nature of the instrument, must accompany the act.
Since the word defraud is used twice, let’s define that word also, from the same source:
[T]o use deceit, falsehoods, or trickery to obtain money, an object, rights or anything of value belonging to another.
Legally, any erroneous information would have to have been put in, or altered, with the intent to defraud, so that simple clerical errors or harmless mistakes would not constitute forgery. For example, if a clerk penciled in the number “9” for the Father’s Race, when the correct code should have been “2”, there is no forgery. Mainly, because there was no evil intent and no one is being defrauded of anything.
Suppose Obama’s real father was Frank Marshall Davis, and not Barack Obama Sr., and Stanley Dunham did not know this, perhaps having slept with both men. Then there would be no forgery. There is no intent to defraud. If, on the other hand, she knew that Frank Marshall Davis (FMD) was the actual father, but listed BO, Sr. as the father anyway, then there would be forgery, of a sort, by the creation of a false document.
But even then, the intent to defraud somebody would have to be proven. It is possible that FMD and BO, Sr. could have agreed to such a listing. Or, if by supplying false information, Stanley Dunham sought to obtain something of value, either money or some right, then there could have been an intent to defraud. The important thing is that the intent to defraud has to be proven, not just assumed.
By definition, any alteration would have to be legally material, that is significant and important, to fit within the definition of forgery. For example, if someone altered the place of birth from Kenya to Hawaii, that would be material. If someone enhanced a barely legible letter, to make it more legible, that would be probably be immaterial. Either way, an intent to defraud would still have to be proven.
All right, now that we have a workable definition of forgery and the intent to defraud and material, let’s look at the online long form:
Remember, that the Hawaii DOH says a long form exists, so unless some information has been added, erased, or changed from that original, then there is no forgery. Mere non-material alteration is NOT forgery. I went through the document and here is a list of 43 items which constitute the information contained on the online document:
File Number 151 on top
Certificate Number 61 10641 on top
Green Security Paper Background
Apr 25 2011 stamped on bottom
Certification on bottom with handwritten Alvin T. Onaka, Ph.D. and stamped State Registrar
1a. Child’s First Name – Barack
1b. Child’s Middle Name – Hussein
1c. Child’s Last Name – Obama, II
2. Sex – Male
3. This Birth – single block marked (as opposed to twin or triplet) and two “x’s” and a “dash” penciled in.
4. If Twin or Triplets Was Child Born 1st, 2nd, 3rd – No Information Entered
5a. Birth Date – August 4, 1961
5b. Hour – 7:24 PM
6a. Place of Birth (City) – Honolulu
6b. Island – Oahu
6c. Name of Hospital – Kapiolani Maternity & Gynecological Hospital
6d. Is Place of Birth Inside City Limits – Yes block is marked.
7a. Usual Residence of Mother (City) – Honolulu
7b. Island – Oahu
7c. County and State – Honolulu, Hawaii
7d. Street Address – 6085 Kalanianaole Highway
7e. Is Residence Inside City Limits – Yes blocked is marked
7f. Mother’s Mailing Address – No Information Entered
7g. Is Residence Inside City Limits – Yes block is marked and number “2” is penciled in.
8. Full Name of Father – Barack Hussein Obama
9. Race of Father – African and number “9” is penciled in.
10. Age of Father – 25
11. Birthplace – Kenya, East Africa and number “2” is penciled in.
12a. Usual Occupation – Student and a “dash” and a “o” are penciled in.
12b. Kind of Business or Occupation – University and number “9” is penciled in.
13. Full Maiden Name of Mother – Stanley Ann Dunham
14. Race of Mother – Caucasian and number “1” is penciled in.
15. Age of Mother – 18
16. Birthplace – Wichita, Kansas and an “a” (?) is penciled in.
17a. Type of Occupation Outside Home During Pregnancy – None and a “0” is penciled in.
17b. Date Last Worked – No Information Entered and a “0” is penciled in.
18a. Signature of Parent – Handwritten (Stanley) Ann Dunham Obama, with block checked for Parent.
18b. Date of Signature – Handwritten 8-7-61
19a. Signature of Attendant – Handwritten David A. Sinclair with M.D. block checked.
20. Date Accepted by Local Registrar – Stamped August 8, 1961
21. Signature of Local Registrar – Handwritten V K L Lee
22. Date Accepted by Reg. General – Stamped August 9 – 1961
23. Evidence for Delayed Filing or Alteration – No Information Entered
Now, for the Crickets Test.
Question 1: Which item(s) of information above has been substantially proven by The Cold Case Posse to be an alteration of a genuine item, that is, information materially altered (changed, added, or erased) and different from the original long form birth certificate???
Question 2: Which item(s) of information above has been substantially proven by The Cold Case Posse to be false from the very creation of an original document???
Question 3: Which item(s) of information above has been substantially proven by The Cold Case Posse to constitute any intent to defraud some other person and obtain some benefit???
Question 4: Notwithstanding any other question and/or answer, which item(s) of information above has been substantially proven by The Cold Case Posse to constitute a legally material alteration of any original information???
I would submit that Sheriff Joe, Deputy Zullo, The Cold Case Posse, Jerome “Jerry” Corsi, and other Birthers have completely and utterly failed to prove any of the elements of a forgery claim. Not only have they failed to substantially prove any of the forgery elements, they have not even made a credible allegation of any element of forgery.
The closest they have come is to argue that the penciled in “9” in the Race of Father block, is either incorrect, or should have resulted in an empty block. Which is at least debatable, and factually incorrect in my opinion.
Yet even on that point, there has been no proof offered that the original long form document did not have such an entry.Additionally, and even if they were correct, they have offered no evidence which shows any intent to defraud anyone, nor have they even bothered to hazard a theory how such an boo-boo could tend to defraud anyone.
Are they truly so incompetent that they fail to realize any of this, or do they just not care???
Note 1: Here is a separate PDF of the Obama Forgery Test to better help you snare the unwary Birther. Feel free to use it and distribute it.