Difference between revisions of "Criticism of Mormonism/Books/Blood of the Prophets: Brigham Young and the Massacre at Mountain Meadows/Use of sources/Bishop Philip Klingensmith"

m (Created page with ' * "How good is Klingensmith's testimony?...upon cross-examination during the first Lee trial, Klingensmith admitted that whatever passed between Lee and Young about the massacre…')
 
m
 
(23 intermediate revisions by 5 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
 +
{{Main Page}}
 +
{{H1
 +
|L=Criticism of Mormonism/Books/Blood of the Prophets: Brigham Young and the Massacre at Mountain Meadows/Use of sources/Bishop Philip Klingensmith
 +
|H=Use of sources: The testimony of Bishop Philip Klingensmith
 +
|T=[[../../]]
 +
|A=Will Bagley
 +
}}
 +
<!-- INSERT CHART HERE -->
 +
<onlyinclude>
 +
{{H2
 +
|L=Criticism of Mormonism/Books/Blood of the Prophets: Brigham Young and the Massacre at Mountain Meadows/Use of sources/Bishop Philip Klingensmith
 +
|H=Use of sources: The testimony of Bishop Philip Klingensmith
 +
|S=
 +
|L1=Question: How reliable is the testimony of Bishop Philip Klingensmith with regard to the Mountain Meadows Massacre?
 +
}}
  
−
* "How good is Klingensmith's testimony?...upon cross-examination during the first Lee trial, Klingensmith admitted that whatever passed between Lee and Young about the massacre was outside his hearing. His testimony was so worthless that U.S. District Attorney Sumner Howard declined to recall Klingensmith for the second trial.  Klingensmith also admitted to participating in the massacre. He turned state's evidence before Lee's first trial in exchange for a grant of immunity. He gave his testimony as a disillusioned apostate. Thus his 6 October 1857 account is very suspect, even without Young's denial."{{ref|klingensmith.1}}
+
==The problem==
 +
* Critics often use the testimony of (former) Bishop Philip Klingensmith on the Massacre.
  
 +
{{:Question: How reliable is the testimony of Bishop Philip Klingensmith with regard to the Mountain Meadows Massacre?}}
  
−
#{{note|klingensmith.1}} {{FR-16-1-9}} <!--Crockett on Bagley-->
+
 
 +
{{Critical sources box:Specific works/Blood of the Prophets: Brigham Young and the Massacre at Mountain Meadows/Use of sources/Bishop Philip Klingensmith/CriticalSources}}
 +
{{endnotes sources}}
 +
 
 +
 
 +
<!-- PLEASE DO NOT REMOVE ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE -->
 +
[[Category:Mountain Meadows Massacre]]

Latest revision as of 13:16, 1 May 2024

Use of sources: The testimony of Bishop Philip Klingensmith



Use of sources: The testimony of Bishop Philip Klingensmith


Jump to details:

The problem

  • Critics often use the testimony of (former) Bishop Philip Klingensmith on the Massacre.


Question: How reliable is the testimony of Bishop Philip Klingensmith with regard to the Mountain Meadows Massacre?

Klingensmith's testimony was considered to be worthless at the time of the trial

Critics often use the testimony of (former) Bishop Philip Klingensmith on the Massacre. One reviewer discussed the problems with this witness:

How good is Klingensmith's testimony?...upon cross-examination during the first Lee trial, Klingensmith admitted that whatever passed between Lee and Young about the massacre was outside his hearing. His testimony was so worthless that U.S. District Attorney Sumner Howard declined to recall Klingensmith for the second trial. Klingensmith also admitted to participating in the massacre. He turned state's evidence before Lee's first trial in exchange for a grant of immunity. He gave his testimony as a disillusioned apostate. Thus his 6 October 1857 account is very suspect, even without Young's denial." [1]



Source(s) of the criticism
Critical sources

Notes

  1. ↑ Robert D. Crockett, "A Trial Lawyer Reviews Will Bagley's Blood of the Prophets," FARMS Review 15/2 (2003): 199–254. off-site
Retrieved from "https://www.fairlatterdaysaints.org/answers/index.php?title=Criticism_of_Mormonism/Books/Blood_of_the_Prophets:_Brigham_Young_and_the_Massacre_at_Mountain_Meadows/Use_of_sources/Bishop_Philip_Klingensmith&oldid=255252"