Revision as of 09:20, 12 April 2017 (view source) RogerNicholson (talk | contribs) (→‎) ← Older edit		Revision as of 09:22, 12 April 2017 (view source) RogerNicholson (talk | contribs) (→‎) Newer edit →
Line 12:		Line 12:
	|subject=1826 trial for "glasslooking"		|subject=1826 trial for "glasslooking"
	|summary=Joseph Smith was brought to trial in 1826 for "glasslooking." Didn't Hugh Nibley claim that if this trial record existed that it would be "the most damning evidence in existence against Joseph Smith?"		|summary=Joseph Smith was brought to trial in 1826 for "glasslooking." Didn't Hugh Nibley claim that if this trial record existed that it would be "the most damning evidence in existence against Joseph Smith?"
−	|sublink1=Question: What is Joseph Smith's 1826 Bainbridge "trial" for "glasslooking"?	+	|sublink1=Question: What is Joseph Smith's 1826 South Bainbridge "trial" for "glasslooking"?
	|sublink2=Question: What events resulted in Joseph Smith's 1826 court appearance in Bainbridge?		|sublink2=Question: What events resulted in Joseph Smith's 1826 court appearance in Bainbridge?
	|sublink3=Question: Why was Joseph fined if he wasn't guilty?		|sublink3=Question: Why was Joseph fined if he wasn't guilty?

---

Revision as of 09:22, 12 April 2017

1. REDIRECTTemplate:Test3

Joseph Smith legal issues: Trials

Joseph Smith and legal trials

1826 trial for "glasslooking"

Summary: Joseph Smith was brought to trial in 1826 for "glasslooking." Didn't Hugh Nibley claim that if this trial record existed that it would be "the most damning evidence in existence against Joseph Smith?"

Was Joseph found guilty of being a "con man"?

Summary: Was Joseph convicted of being a "con man" in a court of law in 1826?