[Up] [Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Mr. Lafosse--certificates claimed to be false

Dear Glen Cook

I have very carefully read the claims on the web site,
http://homepage.eircom.net/~seanjmurphy/chiefs/lafosse.htm.  I do not
support nor deny the claims of Lafosse. The site with it's very pertinent
questions displays a rigorous and proper historical approach.

Where I find problems in the web site's comments  are ;
 " It seemed advisable to verify these documents, and so a letter of enquiry
was sent on 12 April 2002 to the Registrar's Office, Boulevard Anspach 6,
1000 Bruxelles, Belgique. A reply was received by e-mail on 19 April, signed
by the Conseiller Etat Civil, which stated bluntly that the above birth and
marriage certificates were false ('sont des faux'), and furthermore that
Michel Lafosse was born elsewhere in Brussels. A true certificate of
Lafosse's birth is being applied for, and nothing more will be said until
the authentic document is to hand."

A: It is hard, but not impossible, to imagine a Continental Civil servant
replying by email to a letter of enquiry.
B:  I do not know the requirements that entitles a private  third party to
obtain official copies of a living persons birth records.
C: Without the original in hand it is difficult to think that a Civil
Servant would reply ('sont des faux') which translates 'are forgeries'
D: Forgery or alteration of an official document is a criminal act. A Civil
servant aware of such a criminal act would be duty bound to report the
matter to the police.
E: The particular Conseiller Etat Civil is not identified and therefore not

I have written to seanjmurphy@eircom.net asking for a copy of the email. He,
is of course, under no obligation to send me the email in question.  His web
site is crisp, clear and very professional. It displays the passion for
accuracy of a good scholar. The reservation that I list are personal.  They
in no way detract from the validity of the proper historical question that
are posed by Sean J. Murphy.  If Michael is a hoax how does that reflect on
the rest of the historical research in the book?

Since the author of the "Forgotten Monarchy of Scotland" mentions both
Sinclairs and Freemasons in his work it would be wise to find if we have
another careless Fr. Hay or Fredrick Pohl on our doorstep.  With all the
various conflicting claims as to the origins of the family Sinclair and
titles of it's various historical members it would be lovely to find the
bottom of one pit not on Oak Island.

Is Lafosse who he says he is?  Is he a hoax?  What does Michael have to gain
by these claims? Are the detractors more or less reliable than Lafosse?

Kings in Scotland were elected as our chiefs were.  Tanistry was enforced.

----- Original Message -----
From: <CookSLC@aol.com>
To: <sinclair@quarterman.org>
Sent: Wednesday, May 01, 2002 6:27 AM
Subject: Mr. Lafosse--certificates claimed to be false

> http://homepage.eircom.net/~seanjmurphy/chiefs/lafosse.htm

[ This is the Sinclair family discussion list, sinclair@quarterman.org
[ To get off or on the list, see http://sinclair.quarterman.org/list.html