Also minor correction of Hermitian’s claims. The scanner does not allow you to scan directly into external documents…
In many cases—if you’re adding scanned pages to a document you already have open, for example—this is the most convenient approach to scanning. And there are few, if any, other scanners that don’t come with a driver—most often a Twain driver—to let you work this way. With the S1500, however, you’re locked into scanning through Fujitsu’s scan utility, which may or may not feel straightforward to you or easy to use, depending on your tastes, work habits, and experience with scanning.
Based on additional meta-data, the workflow for document 35.1 and 35.2 is hypothesized to be as follows.
1. The MDEC submitted the documents directly to Magistrate Judge Linda R. Anderson’s chambers
2. The documents were scanned in by Judge Wingate’s clerk or assistant
The whole workflow is becoming a little bit more complex for one to be able to conclude forgery as it is now clear that the birth certificate was printed out and likely sent to Hawaii as a text document. The document was submitted to the chambers of the Judge and scanned in there. Making it a bit hard to argue that the court clerk or assistant somehow ‘forged’ the data.
ROTL. Poor Hermitian has yet to explain why these artifacts show evidence of a forgery when the document is, for all practical purposes, identical to the one on the Whitehouse.
I am basing this on the fact that document 42 was scanned in using the PFU ScanSnap Manager 5.1.30 #S1500 software.
The letter was received on 10/02/2012 and entered into the system by “TRS”. TRS shows up in the following cases
Letter from pro se plaintiff, Orly Taitz, Esq. (TRS) (Entered: 10/04/2012)
Creator: PFU ScanSnap Manager 5.1.30 #S1500
Producer: Adobe PDF Scan Library 3.2
CreationDate: Thu Oct 4 14:07:15 2012
ModDate: Thu Oct 4 14:07:15 2012