Uh no. It was your hated Sherman that conducted part of the investigation, and he came to a couple narrow conclusions that didn't exonerate him, but just made him out of the area until the rebels finally decided to pull down the US flag. They kept the US flag up so they could keep killing surrendering union soldiers. Forrest gave the green light to the atrocities by saying beforehand that he would not be responsible. His soldiers knew what that meant, it meant they could torture and kill union soldiers. I was a trick he liked to pull more than once.
This from the referenced book: âThe military investigation thus ordered was carried out by General Brayman, Union commander at Cairo, who on April twenty-eighth sent a copy direct to Secretary Stanton, as ordered, and gave another to the Congressional committee when it visited Cairo. Shermanâs judgment of the âmassacre at Fort Pillowâ as expressed in his Memoirs is that: âNo doubt Forrestâs men acted like a set of barbarians, shooting down the helpless negro garrison after the fort was in their possession; but I am told that Forrest personally disclaims any active participation in the assault, and that he stopped the firing as soon as he could. I also take it for granted that Forrest did not lead the assault in person, and consequently that he was to the rear, out of sight if not of hearing at the time, and I was told by hundreds of our men, who were at various times prisoners in Forrestâs possession, that be was usually very kind to them.â Also this from the same book: âThe third main charge, that the âatrocities committed at Fort Pillowâ were the result of deliberate policy, does not stand up under examination of the Union record.â Also this from Wikipedia: âForrestâs men insisted that the Union soldiers, although fleeing, kept their weapons and frequently turned to shoot, forcing the Confederates to keep firing in self-defense.[10] Their claim is consistent with the discovery of numerous Union rifles on the bluffs near the river.[18] The Union flag was still flying over the fort, which indicated that the force had not formally surrendered. A contemporary newspaper account from Jackson, Tennessee, states that âGeneral Forrest begged them to surrender,â but ânot the first sign of surrender was ever given.â Similar accounts were reported in both Southern and Northern newspapers at the time.[19]â
Again, that doesn't explain union soldiers being nailed to logs, floors, and walls, and then having those logs and huts set on fire, not on the testimony of one, but on the testimony of several.
Forrest hated the black soldier and any white soldier who fought alongside, he said so in his letters. And he never denied the atrocities to Richmond. He said he didn't have to.
Sherman’s own words: “I also take it for granted that Forrest did not lead the assault in person, and consequently that he was to the rear, out of sight if not of hearing at the time, and I was told by hundreds of our men, who were at various times prisoners in Forrestâs possession, that be was usually very kind to them.”