Johannes Antonie Oelofse De Witt
d. 2 Apr 1963
In the family tree this archive was built from.
Family
Each person is marked by where that line came from, in words as well as colour.
Delina de Witt is a half-sibling.
What the record says
Born Circa 1923 · died Apr 2 1963
| What | When | Where | Noted |
|---|---|---|---|
| Birth | Circa 1923 | Pretoria | |
| Death | Apr 2 1963 | Sasolburg |
Where this comes from
Family tree
The tree this register is built from: one MyHeritage harvest, which is somebody else’s research and has not been checked here beyond what is said below.
No record has been read about this person in this archive.
Notes and corrections
Corrected identity
The family record said: son of Johannes Antonie Oelofse de Witt, born circa 1923 at Pretoria
This archive now has: NOT A SECOND PERSON — the same man as 9500005, duplicated
Same name, same birth year as his supposed father, same place of death, and a father-son relationship that is arithmetically impossible. The duplication also invented a wife for him — 'Unknown de Witt', 9500161, who exists only to be his mother — and gave Delina de Witt a half-brother who is really her father. Found by tools/audit-tree.py, 20 September 2026, which flags a parent under fourteen at a child's birth. *** DELIBERATELY NOT COLLAPSED INTO 9500005. *** The DUPLICATES map in tools/build-register.py collapses records only where the pair shares AN IDENTICAL BIRTH AND DEATH DATE, and says in its own comment that those are not guesses. This pair does not meet that bar: the birth places differ, Johannesburg against Pretoria, one birth is 'circa' and only one record carries a death. It is a strong inference and not an identity, so both records stay in the register with this correction attached to them, which is what corrections are for. *** 20 SEPTEMBER 2026: THE BAR HAS BEEN PARTLY MET AND THE RECORDS STILL STAY APART. *** The civil death register gives the birthplace as PRETORIA, which is the duplicate's birthplace and not 9500005's Johannesburg, so the two records now differ on a point where an outside source backs one of them. That strengthens the inference that they are one man and does not turn it into an identity, because nothing yet ties the Johannesburg birth to anybody at all. Both records stay in the register.