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

< Criticism of Mormonism‎ | Books‎ | Blood of the Prophets: Brigham Young and the Massacre at Mountain Meadows‎ | Use of sources

Revision as of 20:26, 19 June 2009 by GregSmith (talk | contribs) (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…')
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)

  • "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]


  1. [note]  Robert D. Crockett, "The Denton Debacle (Review of: American Massacre: The Tragedy at Mountain Meadows, September 1857)," FARMS Review 16/1 (2004): 135–148. off-site