Here in Omni 1:10, the earliest form of the text here has a repeated use of I in “I Abinadom I”. In his editing for the 1837 edition, Joseph Smith eliminated the second I. There are no examples elsewhere in the text of “behold I I ”, but there are 13 instances of “behold I ”, including one later in the book of Omni:
The King James Bible also has one example of this expression: “behold I Paul say unto you” (Galatians 5:2). More generally, in the Book of Mormon text there are no examples of such a repeated I for 165 other cases of I followed by a name.
Joseph’s emendation in Omni 1:10 is therefore supported by the systematic use of “I ” elsewhere in the text. This textual evidence suggests that the repeated I in the earliest reading is an error in the earliest transmission of the text (𝓞 is not extant here). On the other hand, there are no other occurrences in the transmission of the text of a repeated I being accidentally added, especially since such usage is obviously unusual. In fact, the tendency is the opposite—namely, to remove the few repetitions that are found in the text. See, for instance, the discussion regarding the two occurrences of “I I am the Lord’s” in 2 Nephi 28:3.
As noted in the discussion of “I I am the Lord’s” under 2 Nephi 28:3, there are a few cases of repeated I for which there is a single word separating the two I ’s:
These two types, “I even I” and “I behold I”, are also found in the King James Bible, with 19 occurrences of “I even I” and 5 of “I behold I”. Among these, there are two occurrences of the form “I even I ”:
The earliest reading in Omni 1:10, with its difference in word order (“I I ”), could thus be considered a variant of the same basic formulation but without the even. Although the expression “behold I Abinadom I” is unique in the Book of Mormon, the critical text will accept this unusual, but not impossible, reading.
Summary: Restore in Omni 1:10 the earliest reading “behold I Abinadom I am the son of Chemish”; although the repeated I may be the result of an early transmission error, this unique reading is understandable and may have been intended.