In this chapter I diverge from my writing style and will produce historical evidence to support my claim about the Nephilim angels. Although countless books have been written on many historical topics in Mormonism, I am only interested in focusing on one event in Church history: the 1826 trial of Joseph Smith, the “glass looker. Twenty-year-old Joseph Smith was arrested and jailed for two days for being a public nuisance and “disorderly person”. The history of this important trial and outcome is a significant to my claims about the LDS Church. The Mormons admit that such trial occurred, but it is assumed that Joseph was never found guilty, thus ignoring the possibility that Joseph Smith was a less honorable and less reliable than is believed by active members of the Church. The significance of the trial can not be underestimated. It presents evidence that proves Joseph Smith was involved in activities that would evoke the Nephilim visits. My argument of the false angels is hogwash, unless we can find facts that prove Joseph Smith was dabbling into occult powers that deceived him.

Joseph Smith was very careful in wording the history of his experience with Josiah Stoal [Stowel] that led to the trial on March 20, 1826:

“As my father’s worldly circumstances were very limited, we were under the necessity of labor with our hands, hiring out by day’s work and otherwise, as we could et opportunity. Sometimes we were at home, and sometimes abroad, and by continuous labor were enabled to get a comfortable maintenance. In the year of 1823 my father’s family met with a great affliction by the death of my eldest brother, Alvin. In the month of October, 1825, I hired with an old gentleman by the name of Josiah Stoal [Stowel], State of New York. He had heard something of a silver mine having been opened by the Spaniards in harmony, Susquehanna county, State of Pennsylvania; and had, previous to my hiring to him, been digging, in order, if possible, to discover the mine. After I went to live with him, he took me, with the rest of his hands, to dig for the silver mine, at which I continued to work for nearly a month, without success in our undertaking, and finally I prevailed with the old gentlemen to cease digging after it. Hence arose the very prevalent story of my having been a money-digger. (JS History 1:56.)

This is an excellent example of the mind of Joseph Smith. He carefully paints himself as a hero, while discrediting the souls of others. It is pride. He first sets up the need for him to work hard, by explaining his family’s indigent conditions; then he shares the family loss of Alvin, an older brother, invoking sympathy from readers. He is hired by Josiah Stoal [Stowel] to dig for a silver mine, which is hard manual labor, again leaving the clear impression of a self-disciplined young man. Joseph paints himself as a hero for his “continuous labor” for his family, and not just himself. Finally, Joseph Smith “prevailed” with the foolish old gentlemen Stoal [Stowel] to cease his efforts, and thus became his neighbor’s hero as well.

Joseph carefully worded this history so that it is 100% truthful in every account, while at the same time, leaving a false impression outside of reality and fact. Joseph Smith was skilled at provide just enough facts written just right way to let the reader “assume” conclusions that are deliberately misleading. For example, if Joseph Smith was truly found innocent in the 1826 court trial, then why isn’t it mentioned? It was the trial itself, jam-packed with people from all over the county, that created the public image and “prevalent story” about Joseph Smith being a money-digger.

Mormons don’t think deeply about the 1826 trial. It’s not necessary. They “know” the LDS Church is true. Why bother investigating history and facts? They read what Joseph Smith left for them to read about the incident, make faith-promoting assumptions, and then argue that everything that discredits Joseph Smith’s character or reputation is a lie. Joseph Smith is a hero. He convinced the old gentlemen Stoal to stop his foolishness, right? But remember, Joseph Smith was only twenty years old! And he convinced this older man? Stoal was a prominent man with a large estate. He hired a twenty-year old as part of his crew from forty miles away. He kept Joseph at his home. And we are to believe this young man influenced Stoal’s decision to redirect all of his other men and cease operations?

How did Joseph Smith find Stoal? How did they meet? Lucy Mack Smith, Joseph Smith’s mother, gives this account:

“A short time before the house was completed, a man, by the name of Josiah Stoal, came from Chenango, County, New York, with the view of getting Joseph to assist him in digging for a silver mine. He came for Joseph on account of having heard that he possessed certain keys, by which he could discern things invisible to the natural eye.

“Joseph endeavored to divert him from his vain pursuit, but he was inflexible in his purpose, and offered high wages to those who would dig for him, in search of said mine, and still insisted upon having Joseph to work for him. Accordingly, Joseph and several others, returned with him and commenced digging.” (Biographical Sketches of Joseph Smith the Prophet, London, 1853, pp. 91-92.)

Notice in this account that Stoal was insistent on hiring Joseph Smith at high wages. Why? What was so special about Joseph Smith that he was so desperately needed? If this twenty-year-old young man was viewed as a holy prophet, preaching faith and repentance, it is unlikely Stoal would have approached him on the basis of religion or Christ. Jesus did nothing of the sort in the Bible. Treasure hunting by the Son of God? If Stoal believed Joseph Smith saw Jesus Christ, how could he or anyone have the gall to ask Joseph Smith to use God’s power to search for treasures? If we are Mormons, we must view Stoal through this Biblical lens. Does Stoal’s behavior fit the Bible’s perspective? No. It’s not the right view at all. Rather, Stoal likely viewed Joseph’s powers much like we today view a “psychic” advertising their spiritual gifts for sale. And he wanted Joseph’s power to find treasure. Now, where did this “psychic image” originate? Mormons argue that those who desired to destroy Joseph created this false image of him. This “psychic image” is so contrary to LDS view of the “prophet” Joseph Smith that it is impossible to reconcile the image as founded in truth. So it’s a lie. Joseph Smith wasn’t a “psychic”, he was a prophet of God like Moses, Peter, James, or John!

But is it a lie? Let’s examine the evidence further.

Notice that the twenty-year old Joseph “prophet” was unable to persuade Stoal, but rather, Stoal persuaded him. Joseph went to dig for him anyway. Is that an example of a young David or Samual? Or Paul? Just look at the evidence. Finally, like Joseph Smith, Lucy Mack Smith did not mention the 1826 trial as quoted in the book referenced. The very reason Joseph got his fame for money-digging is again omitted, deliberately. If he was truly innocent at that trial, and if there was absolutely no validity to the claims presented against him, then this surely could have been paraded as “egg on your face” to the Anti-Mormons, right?

But Joseph and his mother deliberately omitted the trial from history. Why? I’ll put myself in Joseph’s position to better understand. If I was arrested and found guilty of even a traffic ticket, would I want to parade my conviction around to everyone? No! I might have been young and immature, but why do I want to shoot myself in the foot and tell the world? It’s very embarrassing. On the other hand, I’m not going to lie about it either and deny what happened. That’s clearly wrong. So I’ll just not talk about it. I’ll be very careful with my words. By so doing, people will likely assume I am an innocent person, believe me, and join the Church. And this is prudent for their salvation. It is nothing new. We all do the same thing with our mistakes or public embarrassments.

And this is just what Joseph Smith did. And it was effective. For example, Oliver Cowdrey was convinced of Joseph’s impeccable character and wrote:

“Soon after this visit to Cumorah, a gentleman from the south part of the State,…employed our brother [Joseph Smith]…This gentleman, whose name is Stowel, resided in the town of Bainbridge, ….Some forty miles south, …it is said to be a cave…where a company of Spaniards, …coined a large quantity of money;…our brother was required to spend a few months with some others in excavating the earth, in pursuit of this treasure….

“On the private character of our brother I need add nothing further, at present, previous to his obtaining the records of the Nephites, and only that while in that county, some very officious person complained of him as a disorderly person, and brought him before the authorities of the court; but there being no cause of action he was honorably acquitted.” (Latter Day Saints’ Messenger and Advocate, Oct. 1835, vol. 2, pages 200-201.)

Based on Joseph Smith’s and his mother’s viewpoint, most members of the LDS Church believe exactly as Oliver Cowdery did. They will assume that evil men tried to discredit the prophet with false stories and allegations that were complete lies, and the prophet Joseph Smith was a hero, innocent as a little child. He could not have been a threat to anyone. It was all of the devil to stop the work of God. The LDS Church is true; Joseph Smith was a true prophet, and anyone having that burning testimony will be forced into making snappy judgements and quick-and-easy conclusions without picking up one book to investigate the matter seriously and think it through! I’ve spend a significant portion of this book addressing the false LDS testimony process, for it is a key to understanding why the LDS issues become so emotionally charged and biased in the LDS Church. Belief is transformed into “knowledge” from God, and therefore, God surely can not lie about the LDS the true religion. Joseph Smith could NOT have been dabbling into occult powers. Impossible! God just doesn’t work that way! That is the basic assumption people make again and again when confronted with tangible facts that contradict their personal images and feelings for Joseph Smith: “There MUST BE an explanation. Someone is lying. So I’ll trust my own feelings that the Church is true,” they reason.

With this view, we can easily understand why Oliver Cowdery wrote what he did in 1835. Oliver Cowdrey was not a part of the Smith family in 1826, but was introduced to Joseph Smith three years later on April 5, 1829. Naturally, by 1829 the trial was three years previous and was best left unmentioned, just as Joseph recorded in his history. Did Joseph Smith really have to say more? No. People wouild naturally conclude that he was innocent, just like Oliver Cowdery did. It is assumptive thinking. It is the essence of Mormonism and it’s success. By “knowing” the LDS Church is true, the mind will filter all information through that lens, and it will automatically produce assumptions that may or may not be true. The assumptions will enter the mind with such force and passion, this false knowledge blinds the mind to objective analysis of the facts. For example, in the case of Oliver Cowdrey, was his conclusion based on his “testimony of Joseph Smith” or the “court proceedings”? Judge for yourself. The actual court proceedings were published in the Fraser’s Magazine in February of 1873.

“State of New York v. Joseph Smith.

“Warrant issued upon written complaint upon oath of Peter G. Bridgeman, who informed that one Joseph Smith of Bainbridge was a disorderly person and an impostor.

“Prisoner brought before Court March 20, 1826. Prisoner examined: says that he came from the town of Palmyra, and had been at the house of Josiah Stowel in Bainbridge most of time since; had small part of time been employed in looking for mines, but the major part had been employed by said Stowel on his farm, and going to school. That he had a certain stone which he had occasionally looked at to determine where hidden treasures in the bowels of the earth were; that he professed to tell in this manner where gold mines were a distance under ground, and had looked for Mr. Stowel several times and had informed him where he could find these treasures, and Mr. Stowel had been engaged in digging for them. That at Palmyra he pretended to tell by looking at this stone where coined money was buried in Pennsylvania, and while at Palmyra had frequently ascertained in that way where lost property was of various kinds; that he had occasionally been in the habit of looking through this stone to find lost property for three years, but of late had pretty much given it up on account of its injuring his health, especially his eyes, making them sore; that he did not solicit business of this kind, and had always rather declined having anything to do with this business.

"Josiah Stowel sworn: says that prisoner had been at his house something like five months; had been employed by him to work on farm part of time; that he pretended to have skill of telling where hidden treasures in the earth were by means of looking through a certain stone; that prisoner had looked for him sometimes; once to tell him about money buried in Bend Mountain in Pennsylvania, once for gold on Monument Hill, and once for a salt spring; and that he positively knew that the prisoner could tell, and did possess the art of seeing those valuable treasures through the medium of said stone; that he found the [word illegible] at Bend and Monument Hill as prisoner represented it; that prisoner had looked through said stone for Deacon Attleton for a mine, did not exactly find it, but got a p---[word unfinished] of ore which resembled gold, he thinks; that prisoner had told by means of this stone where a Mr. Bacon had buried money; that he and prisoner had been in search of it; that prisoner had said it was in a certain root of a stump five feet from surface of the earth, and with it would be found a tail feather; that said Stowel and prisoner thereupon commenced digging, found a tail feather, but money was gone; that he supposed the money moved down. That prisoner did offer his services; that he never deceived him; that prisoner looked through stone and described Josiah Stowel's house and outhouses, while at Palmyra at Simpson Stowel's, correctly; that he had told about a painted tree, with a man's head painted upon it, by means of said stone. That he had been in company with prisoner digging for gold, and had the most implicit faith in prisoner's skill.

"Arad Stowel sworn: says that he went to see whether prisoner could convince him that he possessed the skill he professed to have, upon which prisoner laid a book upon a white cloth, and proposed looking through another Stone which was white and transparent, hold the stone to the candle, turn his head to book, and read. The deception appeared so palpable that witness went off disgusted.

"McMaster sworn: says he went with Arad Stowel, and likewise came away disgusted. Prisoner pretended to him that he could discover objects at a distance by holding this white stone to the sun or candle; that prisoner rather declined looking into a hat at his dark coloured stone, as he said that it hurt his eyes.

"Jonathan Thompson says that prisoner was requested to look for chest of money; did look, and pretended to know there it was; and that prisoner, Thompson, and Yeomans went in search of it; that Smith arrived at spot first; was at night; that Smith looked in hat while there, and when very dark, told how the chest was situated. After digging several feet, struck upon something sounding like a board or plank. Prisoner would not look again, pretending that he was alarmed on account of the circumstances relating to the trunk being buried, [which] came all fresh to his mind. That the last time he looked he discovered distinctly the two Indians who buried the trunk, that a quarrel ensued between them, and that one of said Indians was killed by the other, and thrown into the hole beside the trunk, to guard it, as he supposed. Thompson says that he believes in the prisoner's professed skill; that the board which he struck his spade upon was probably the chest, but on account of an enchantment the trunk kept settling away from under them when digging, that notwithstanding they continued constantly removing the dirt, yet the trunk kept about the same distance from them. Says prisoner said that it appeared to him that salt might be found at Bainbridge, and that he is certain that prisoner can divine things by means of said stone. That as evidence of the fact prisoner looked into his hat to tell him about some money witness lost sixteen years ago, and that he described the man that witness supposed had taken it, and the disposition of the money:

"And therefore the Court find the Defendant guilty. Costs: Warrant, 19c. Complaint upon oath, 25 1/2c. Seven witnesses, 87 1/2c. Recognisances [sic], 25c. Mittimus, 19c. Recognisances [sic] of witnesses, 75c. Subpoena, 18c. - $2.68. (Frasers, Feb 1873, page 229-230.)"

It is very interesting that Joseph did tell the truth in his history, for the court proceedings also reveals that Joseph worked for Stowel on odd jobs, as well as using his divination powers. We can also see how Joseph Smith rationalized his being the one to convince Stowel to abandon his designs for money-digging: 1) Looking at the peep stone was injuring Joseph’s health, and he wished to stop. 2) The treasure was illusive and impossible to obtain, as it kept sinking into the earth. An occult experience like that would scare any twenty-year-old to stop the treasure hunting endeavors. But of course, Joseph is going to take credit for stopping Stoal’s searching and not the fact that everyone probably got spooked, including himself. This unusual experience likely spread to the family and friends of Stowel, giving good reason to go to authorities and arrest Joseph and stop the “treasure hunting”. It was truly getting dangerous.

What if Josiah Stowel Were Your Father?

If Josiah Stowel was your father, and he came home with a tale of magic sinking treasures impossible to get by digging, what would you do? Where would you go to help your father? I believe asking questions like this, makes the Anti-Mormon explanation much more believable than the LDS unclear and vague claim that “everyone was against Joseph Smith. Liars! He was persecuted just like the prophets of old!” This sounds like valid argument, until we investigate the evidence and begin to see Joseph’s testimony as well as the type of people testifying against Joseph on March 20, 1826. Some were outstanding citizens who really had no reason to bring a hard working, honest, and repentance-preaching prophet to justice. Was Joseph Smith bringing people to Jesus Christ, and being persecuted for the name of Jesus? No. Was Joseph offending people because he “testified of their sins”? That is the true Biblical pattern of the prophets. If the LDS position where correct, we would see something much different in the court proceedings. We would see people offended at the concept of repentance, not spooked over chests of treasure sinking into the ground, unable by human effort to obtain.

The 1826 court trial and sentence of Joseph Smith is devastating to the LDS Church. So where did the court proceeding come from? That is the key question. The court record was brought to Salt Lake City by Emily Pearsall, the niece of Albert Neely, who was the judge of the case. When Charles Marshall published the record in Fraser’s Magazine, he stated:

“During my stay in Salt Lake permission was courteously accorded me to copy out a set of such judicial proceedings not hitherto published. I cannot doubt their genuineness. The original papers were lent to me by a lady of well-known position, in whose family they had been preserved since the date of the transactions.” (Fraser’s Magazine, Feb. 1873, Vol. VII, page 229.)

The evidence glares at the Mormons and suggests that false Nephilim angels later produced the Book of Mormon. However, the power of the “LDS testimony process” will cause a Mormon to refuse to accept these facts as valid: The court proceedings and judgement against Joseph Smith are such a contradiction to LDS theology, it just can’t be true. “ Someone is lying!” the Mormons gasp. That is the hope of the LDS position. It fits with the thought pattern: “I’m right because you are wrong”, which has already been discussed. It is a dark and sandy foundation to stand on, for there is no light in it. And the source of the logic was the false light of Joseph Smith, who refused to acknowledge his sins before the people, but rather, focused on and bragged about his strengths over and over. And this is what angered Joseph Smith’s enemies. He refused to see his errors and painted himself a “good person”. When confronted with the truth, he evasively and skillfully moved away from the question, just as he avoided talking about his 1826 conviction in his written history.

The court proceedings have been published more than once in the past 170 years, and yet, it is ignored by the LDS Church. “It’s a lie,” the Mormons argue. When Fawn Brodie published “No Man Knows My History”, she quoted Fraser’s Magazine, and the LDS leaders immediately renounced the court record as a fabrication and forgery.

“…the alleged find is no discovery at all, for the purported record has been included in other books…after all her puffing and promise the author produces no court record at all. Though persistently calling it such….This alleged record is obviously SPURIOUS…The really vital things which a true record must contain are not there, though there is a lot of surplus verbiage set out in an impossible order which the court was not required to keep.

“This record could not possibly have been made at the time as the case proceeded. It is patently a fabrication of unknown authorship and never in the court records at all.” (Deseret News, Church Section, May 11, 1946, as quoted in A New Witness for Christ in America, Vol 2, pp. 430-431.)

LDS Apostle John A. Widtsoe stated:

“This alleged court record…seems to be a literary attempt of an enemy to ridicule Joseph Smith by bringing together all the current gossip of that day and making him appear to confess to it….There is no existing proof that such a trial was ever held.” (Joseph Smith—Seeker After Truth, Salt Lake City, 1951, p. 78.)

Mormon scholar Francis W. Kirkham wrote:

“A careful study of all the facts regarding this alleged confession of Joseph Smith in a court of law that he had used a seer stone to find hidden treasures for purposes of fraud, must come to the conclusion that no such record was ever made, and therefore, is not in existence…No record exists and there is no evidence to prove one was ever made in which he confessed in a justice of peace that he had used a seer stone to find hidden treasures for purposes of fraud and deception.” (A new Witness For Christ in America, vol. 1, pp. 385, 386 & 391)

These examples, I believe, are representative of the LDS view, and they illustrate how strong the LDS testimony process really is. If a person knows something is “true”, what are they to do with evidence that contradicts that sure knowledge? The brain will REFUSE to process the facts properly. Interestingly, notice how Francis Kirkham defends Joseph Smith’s character, focusing on Joseph’s supposed motive of “fraud and deception”. It is a typical response to the unbalanced and incorrect views of Anti-Mormons claiming that Joseph Smith wrote the Book of Mormon, which he did not. My book hopefully places a new view in front of us, so that we can avoid mistakes on both sides of the debate.

With that said, we again are faced with the evidence. Was Emily Pearsall, the neice of judge Albert Neely, a liar? Or were the court proceedings accurate?

It is interesting that time always vindicates the truth. In 1971 Wesley P. Walters actually went to the Bainbridge Court house in search of evidence to validate the 1826 court proceedings of Emily Pearsall. He found a bill itemized by justice Albert Neely that included a reference to the 1826 trial of Joseph Smith:

Same vs Joseph Smith The Glass Looker Misdemeanor
March 20, 1826
To my fees in examination of the above cause $2.68
(Mormonism-Shadow or Reality? 1972, pg. 33.)

Now what do we do with this evidence? Just throw it out? We know the evidence clearly establishes a trial actually took place, that Joseph Smith was thought to be a “glass looker”, and that he was charged with a “misdemeanor”. But the Mormon’s don’t see it. It’s like having a photograph of a round earth and someone argues it is flat because the picture has been “tampered”. Is this true? Is the evidence bogus? Do people in high standing reputation such as Arad Stowell, who was serving as school commissioner, suddenly become liars and scoundrels? How can this be? Or could it be Arad Stowell was only doing his job and saw Joseph Smith as a irresponsible “psychic” that was endangering those who believed him? Do all Anti-Mormons have to be “liars” against Joseph Smith, combined by the powers of hell to destroy him? For Mormons, yes! They must conclude Joseph was a hero and all others liars to make the trial evidence vanish, or it doesn’t fit the testimony they know to be true “in their hearts”. God doesn’t lies, man does. So they believe in their testimony from God, and not the evidence.

The trial evidence is absolutely iron-clad that Joseph Smith was arrested and found guilty of being a “glass looker”, Mormons are going to disregard the facts anyway. Amazing! For example, here is a discussion about the 1826 trial that was posted on the Internet with “Kevin” and myself on April 14, 1998.

KEVIN’S response: Another trial, which anti-Mormon writers take delight in commenting upon, took place in 1826, when Joseph was just twenty years old, and before he received the Book of Mormon plates. Recently-discovered court records show that the trial actually did take place. Apparently the trial, once again, was in the nature of harassment, for the charge once more was that Joseph was a "disorderly person." It was also alleged that he was "a vagrant, without visible means of support," but Joseph's employer, Josiah Stowell, quickly made short work of that falsehood. The trial focused on Joseph's work, for he had been employed to dig. That's hard work, not vagrancy! But the focus was on what he was employed to dig for, and that supposedly was for a treasure which was believed to have been buried in that area. Now, digging for treasure did not violate. Any New York State law, so there was no grounds for guilt on that count. The trial also focused on the fact that Joseph apparently had power to see unseen things by looking into a stone. Informed Mormons, who know of Joseph's use of a seer stone and also of the Urim and Thummim, feel no concern at this, for they know of several times when he used this ability to good advantage.

MY RESPONSE: Your complete ignorance is apparent. Where did you get this information? The trial focused on his “peep stone” powers, which Stowell testified Joseph possessed. Did you make up your version? Joseph wasn’t arrested for “digging for treasure”. The history of the trial is that Stowell’s family was upset because he heard about Joseph’s powers with the peep stone, and Stowell hired Joseph to help him find buried treasures. His family felt Joseph’s influence was causing Mr. Stowell to waste the family inheritance and they wanted him to STOP looking for treasure. Hence, they dragged Joseph into court to have him stopped. They declared Joseph guilty as charged, but he was so young, the court let him go or “discharged him”. And your thought about “Informed Mormons” who try to tie the “peep stone” to the Urim and Thummim makes little sense…the powers were not being used to translate any ancient writings, but to find buried treasure! The significance of this trial is that it proves Joseph Smith was using occult powers that would attract the Nephilim angels to deceive him! There is absolutely uncontroversial evidence to my claim. AGAIN: Joseph was being set up to receive the Nephilim angels! That is the issue of the trial. Even if he were NOT FOUND GUILTY, which he was, Joseph showed the stone and agreed that he used it to “see” things. He was a glass looker.

The peep stone power is the occult signs of working with the Nephilim—D&C 111 given in 1837 confirms this desire in Joseph that he never renounced. Of course Mormon writers are not going to be concerned about this. They don’t understand the Nephilim and assume that Moroni was from God. So of course they are going to take that position. But the fact is, Joseph had a peep stone, AN HE USED IT! (Does this sound like a Biblical prophet?)

KEVIN’S RESPONSE: Anti-Mormon writers, however, try to greatly inflate the matter, portraying Joseph as what they call a "glass looker," and attempt to link the situation with matters of the occult. The discovered record gives little detail--what historians have is a bill from Constable DeZeng for the usual pre-trial expenses of a process server and constable, for serving a warrant on Joseph, subpoenaing the witness, notifying two justices, ten miles of travel, and attendance with the prisoner two days and one night, presumably the day and night before the trial and the day of the trial itself. Judge Albert Neely's bill of costs has also been found, consisting of 20 words, and identifying the charge as a misdemeanor, and showing that the total costs for the case were $2.68.

MY RESPONSE: Again, I’m surprised at you response. The “$2.68, Joseph Smith the glass looker” misdemeanor, and the date March 20, 1826, establishes CREDIBILITY of the 1873 Fraser Magazine 1826 court proceeding.

KEVIN’S RESPONSE: The historical records differ on the matter. Fraser's magazine, which printed the brief account of the trial in 1873, contains one sentence that says, "And therefore the Court finds the Defendant guilty." But the witness who kept the notes of the trial recorded a different outcome. Judge Neely asked W.D. Purple, who was later a prominent physician in Chenango County, to take notes on the trial. He recorded that "the testimony of Deacon Stowell could not be impeached, the prisoner was discharged."

MY RESPONSE: “Being discharged” just says he was let go. They let him go because of his age, not because he was innocent. Can’t you see that? But the judge charged him with a misdemeanor. He was found guilt… Shall I not expose all of the writings of W.D. Purple about the 1826 trial? Have you read them? Here are is an example:

“More than fifty years since, as the commencement of his professional career, the writer [W.D. Purple] spent a year in the present village of Afton, in the County. It was then called South Bainbridge,….In the year 1825 we often saw in that quiet hamlet, Joseph Smith, Jr…He was an inmate of the family of Deacon Isaiah Stowell. Mr.Stowel…took upon himself a monomanical impression to seek for hidden treasures which he believed were buried in the earth. He hired help and repaired to Northern Pennsylvania, in the vicinity of Lanesboro, to prosecute his research for untold wealth which he believed to be buried there….There had lived a few years previous to this date, in the vicinity of Great Bend, a poor man named Joseph Smith…Mr. Stowell, while at Lanesboro, heard of the fame of one of his sons, named Joseph , who, by the aid of a magic stone had become a famous seer of lost or hidden treasures….He, with the magic stone, was at once transferred from his humble abode to the more pretentious mansion of Deacon Stowell. Here, in the estimation of the Deacon, he confirmed his conceded powers as a seer, by means of the stone which he placed in his hat, and by excluding the light from all terrestial things, could see whatever he wished, even in the depths of the earth.

“In February, 1826, the sons of Mr. Stowell, who lived with their father, were greatly incensed against Smith, as they plainly saw their father squandering his property in the fruitless search for hidden treasures, and saw that the youthful seer had unlimited control over the illusions of their sire….They caused the arrest of Smith as a vagrant, without visible means of livelihood. The trial came on in the above mentioned month, before Albert Neeley, Esq., the father of Bishop Neeley of the State of Maine. I was an intimate friend of the Justice, and was invited to take notes of the trial, which I did. There was a large collection of persons in attendance, and the proceedings attracted much attention.

“The affidavits of the sons were read, and Mr. Smith was fully examined by the Court….On request of the Court, he exhibited the stone. It was about the size of a small hen’s egg, in the shape of a high-instepped shoe. It was composed of layers of different colors passing diagonally through it. It was very hard and smooth, perhaps by being carried in the pocket.

“Joseph Smith, Sr., was present, and sworn as a witness…

“The next witness called was deacon Isaiah Stowell. He confirmed all that is said above in relation to himself, and delineated many other circumstances not necessary to record. He swore that the prisoner possessed all the power he claimed, and declared he could see things fifty fee below the surface of the earth, as plain as the witness could see what was on the Justice’s table, and described very many circumstances to confirm his words. Justice Neeley soberly looked a the witness and in a solemn, dignified voice, said, "“Deacon Stowell, do I understand you as swearing before God, under the solemn oath you have taken that you believe the prisoner can see by the aid of the stone fifty feet below the surface of the earth, as plainly as you can see what is on my table? Do I believe it? Says Deacon Stowell, Do I believe it? No, it is not a matter of belief. I positively KNOW it to be true.”

“Mr Thompson, an employee of Mr. Stowell, was the next witness….The following scene was described by this witness, and carefully noted: Smith had told the Deacon that very many years before a band of robbers had buried on his flat a box of treasure, as it was very valuable they had by sacrifice placed a charm over it to protect it, so that it could not be obtained except by faith, accompanied by certain talismanic influences. So, after arming themselves with fasting and prayer, they salied forth to the spot designated by Smith, Digging was commenced with fear and trembling, in the presence of this imaginary charm. In a few feet from the surface the box of treasure was struck by the shovel, on which they redoubled their energies, but it gradually receded from their grasp. One of the men placed his hand upon the box, but it gradually sunk from his reach….Mr. Stowell went to his flock and selected a fine vigorous lamb, and resolved to sacrifice it to the demon spirit who guarded the coveted treasure. Shortly after the vernarble Deacon might be seen on his knees at prayer near the pit, while Smith, with a lantern in on hand to dispel the midnight darkness might be seen making a circuit around the spot, sprinkling the flowing blood from the lamb upon the ground, as a propitiation to the spirit that thwarted them. They then descended the excavation, but the treasure still receded from their grasp, and it was never obtained…(The Chenango Union, Norwhich, N.Y., May 3, 1877 referenced in Mormonism: Shadow or Reality? 1872, pg 37.)

Kevin, this evidence is exactly the kind of dabbling into the occult that set Joseph Smith up to receive false visitations from the Nephilim. Have you studied the occult at all, and do you understand the Satanic spells placed by sacrifice as recorded by W.D. Purple?

KEVIN’S RESPONSE: Anti-Mormon authors, however, eager to portray Joseph as a wrongdoer, never mention Mr. Purple's statement of the trial's outcome, though most of the trial details they quote are from his quotes.("Joseph Smith and the 1826 Trial: New Evidence and New Difficulties," Hill, Marvin S. pp 223-233).<<---Duane S. Crowther (Doctrinal Dimensions pp. 288-292)

MY RESPONSE: Kevin, being DISCHARGED is exactly what happened. He was let go because of his age. But he was still found guilty. The LDS position tries to blow away the JUDGE’S final decision. The fact is he was charged with a misdemeanor. Of course he was found guilty. (In fact, considering the testimony of sacrificing lambs and sprinkling blood and peep stones, IF YOU WERE THE JUDGE, seeing Joseph Smith holding the stone, and unemployed, what verdict would YOU have made? Absolutely true he found Joseph Smith guilty of being a disorderly person (not for mining as you say, for such was never the reason for the trial…who cares about the laws of the state of New York about mining? It’s not even what he was tried for! If you were the judge, and Joseph Smith held up his stone and confessed, what would you think? Especially after the testimony about the sheep sacrifice?) Thus we see: “Joseph Smith the glass looker: “MISDAMEANER” in the court records.

In addition to his peep stone, Joseph Smith also carried with him a Jupiter Talisman that is used by occultists to produce charms and supernatural powers to aid believers. It is currently in possession of the LDS Church. Much has been written about this Jupiter Talisman. One claim is that Joseph Smith had the occult stone in his pocket when he was killed, based on the testimony of his wife, Emma Smith, as told by her son. Others claim this is false, based on the list of items recorded at the time of his death. And my opinion? I’m relying on the testimony of Emma’s son, who heard his mother testify that it was in Joseph’s pocket when he was killed. It is true, there is documentation that suggest that the occult piece was not part of the items in possession of the prophet, which was itemized on paper by the lawyer who was involved. The Mormons will use this evidence claiming Emma’s son was a “lying”. As usual, we have a boiling conflict. It is black-and-white, “either/or” logic. The two sides are in a deadlock, each having valid evidence to support their position. Which one do I choose? If I choose the documentation of the lawyer who recorded the items on Joseph Smith’s body, then I call Emma and/or Emma’s son deliberate LIARS. And I hate these types of choices in researching LDS history. The pattern is always the same—we examine the evidence, and in the end, we see “tampered evidence” and “covert motives” invalidates what we observe. It leaves the reader perplexed, confused, and frustrated at how long it takes to get to the real issues and the truth. Those with little patience or who dislike mud slinging will refuse to get involved and walk away, shaking their heads in disgust. Sipping cold drinks on the beach is much more inviting than wading in the refuse of Mormonism.

Unfortunately, those of us who truly need answers to Mormonism can’t just walk away. We need to make some kind of evaluation of the facts. In my case, I despise calling people liars, but I admit it does happen on occasion, and some motives are less than honorable on both sides. But I’m not interested in sides. I’m more interested in the truth. In the case of the Jupiter Talisman, I reason, “Well, they BOTH could be right.” Perhaps, for whatever reason, the talisman was accidentally left off the list of items. Or perhaps, because of its supposed powers, it was removed privately by a separate process and given to the Emma. That is possible. And this is what I choose to believe. Why? Because to do otherwise, claims Emma is a liar, and I do not wish to paint her as such. Of course, I admit maybe she did lie. Maybe her son did. If this is true, then it reveals the kind of lying spirit one or both were under, which only discredits the prophet Joseph’s integrity and honor—by painting Emma or her son as a liar. The fact that Emma denied Joseph’s practice of plural marriages suggests that she could also lie about the Talisman. That is compelling evidence. But it slings mud at human beings, and I care not to do that. So, I’ve chosen to believe talisman was on his person when he died.

But what is most interesting about the talisman debate is that people spend so much energy deciding whether or not Joseph had it on his person when he died. And that’s not the issue at all. The important fact is the Joseph Smith actually believed in and used an occult object of worship. It can not be disputed. Thus, the evidence is overwhelming that Joseph was into talisman powers that would attract the Nephilim angels to him. And yet, the Mormon people don’t see the significance of the facts nor the implications. Rather, they just argue over the insignificant issue of whether the talisman was in his pocket or not when he died! “Look, the evidence of the lawyer says it wasn’t on his person. Someone’s lying!” they argue. But all of that is unimportant. For example, if Emma really lied, or her son, and either one stretched the truth to make the story more dramatic, is this truth going to change my view of Mormonism? Absolutely not. I just will use that fact to prove Joseph Smith taught is wife and family to embellish the truth and fabricate stories to serve an end goal. In this case, it provides evidence about my claim to Joseph Smith justifying changing the First Vision Story, and his tendency to manipulate information to serve his purposes to promote the priesthood of God.

So the Mormon position is weak in either argument. And in the end, when all the dust settle, we look and see a Jupiter Talisman in the archives of the LDS Church. We wonder and stare. What does it tell us? The Jupiter Talisman proves Joseph Smith never renounced his occult practices of divination as a sin, thus leaving him open to Satanic deception throughout his ministry. He continually mixed occult powers with the gospel of Jesus Christ, and thus, the Nephilim angels influenced him.

Finally, there is more historical evidence that suggest Joseph Smith was mixed up with non-Biblical powers, such as the Masonic rituals, and I invite the reader to investigate both sides of the debate further.