The testimony of an eyewitness. In this case Young's adopted son John D. Lee along with all the accompanying court documents at Lee's trial. Lee testified that on September 11, 1857 he and several Mormon militiamen approached the Fancher party under a white flag. Lee told them he had negotiated a truce and would conduct them to safety if they surrendered their stock and supplies to the Indians. They agreed, and Lee proceeded to separate the children, women and men. According to Lee’s own testimony and confession, as well as the testimony of survivors, they began walking toward Cedar City, the very young children in a wagon, the women and men walking in single file, each man with a Mormon militiaman by his side. A brief synopsis of these court records goes something like this, "As the women and children disappeared over a rise, the Mormons started shooting. When it was over, all the emigrants, but for 17 of the children deemed to young to remember the slaughter, were dead. The Mormons stripped the bodies of clothing and jewelry and left them lightly covered with leaves and dirt, which soon blew away leaving the bodies to be eaten by wildlife. They placed the surviving children with Mormon families, including those of the militiamen who had taken part in the killing. Two years later, after a US government investigation, the children were removed and reunited with other family members." As previously stated when I referred to Lee's trial, he was in fact the only man ever charged in the massacre. He was convicted and shot by firing squad at Mountain Meadows on March 23, 1877. The facts of this event cannot be challenged, indeed the Mormon Church don't deny it either, unless you want to challenge official court documents.
To be unbiased in my reporting, the Mormon Church has for years blamed this event on 'renegade' church members and deny that Young ever had anything to do with this event, but they don't deny the event happening. However this is in direct contradiction to the eye witness accounts as recorded in Lee's trial. In fact there are many historians and descendants of the victims, who hold that the preponderance of evidence shows that Brigham Young must, at the very least, have had foreknowledge of the attack and that his vitriolic speeches and sermons inflamed his followers.
Hope this helps. You of course can choose to believe the official position of the LDS that Young didn't have anything to do with it and that his son Lee lied at his trial. That is up to you. I, however, choose to take at face value the testimony of Lee along with his confession. This confession along with the eye witness testimony at the time clearly points to Young's involvement. You can always buy the books of course -- I believe all these court documents and testimonies are in there.
I only mentioned this as you posted something about 'mainstreamers' murdering Joseph Smith as if all 'mainstreamers' are bloodthirsty villains. This account proves of course there were some bloodthirsty Mormons in this time period as well which shouldn't be overlooked. And that's a fair assessment even IF you take the LDS position it was 'renegade' Mormons. The renegades were still Mormons.
So, you now admit the falsity of your statement and publicy admit that there is NO EVIDENCE WHATSOEVER that Brigham Young actually ordered the murders, as you previously claimed. The implication is that you lied.
It was not the mainstream who murder Joseph Smith, anymore than God fearing white Christians accepted the KKK.
Joseph was Murder by a mob that just happens to attend the MS church.
As far as MMM Brigham Young was always a hands on if what you are accusing him of he would have been there. Since Brigham Young never did anything like that in his history why are you trying to take the words of the disgruntle, who are mostly made up of anti’s be they atheist, homosexuals who were excommunicate, and others of a humanist bend!