There's a big difference here. Court proceedings
are published, unlike
birth certificates, and are certainly not confidential, like medical
records. These are both published documents. How can the use of published
documents, to verify that they said what they are reported to have said, be
said to be "original research" or, for that matter, "investigative
journalism"?
Stating a simple fact from a simple primary source is not a problem.
Putting together an entire history of a case from multiple primary
sources is OR. A history is more than just the sum of the events -
which events you choose to include and which you don't, how much
emphasis you put on each one, etc, all change the way the reader will
interpret the facts, that's what makes it OR and an NPOV violation.