The Trial of Joseph Smith

[consiglieri]

Hear ye, hear ye!

The Court of Common Opinion is in session.

Joseph Smith has been charged by the prosecution with the crime of forgery and fraud in foisting upon a credulous world a record he claims is ancient, said record being The Book of Mormon.

This being a criminal charge, the prosecution must prove its case beyond a reasonable doubt. Although the defense has no burden of proof in this trial, the defense may present any evidence it chooses at the close of the prosecution's case.

Ladies and gentlemen of the jury, you will now give your strict attention to the opening statement of the prosecutor . . .

[AtticusFinch]

who is the DA and who is the defense attorney?

Also, claims that are simply "it was copied from KJV and stuff like that are not sufficient. One must actually make the claim and provide evidence

[mledbetter]

Hear ye, hear ye!

The Court of Common Opinion is in session.

Joseph Smith has been charged by the prosecution with the crime of forgery and fraud in foisting upon a credulous world a record he claims is ancient, said record being The Book of Mormon.

This being a criminal charge, the prosecution must prove its case beyond a reasonable doubt. Although the defense has no burden of proof in this trial, the defense may present any evidence it chooses at the close of the prosecution's case.

Ladies and gentlemen of the jury, you will now give your strict attention to the opening statement of the prosecutor . . .

Are there any living witnesses? This should be interesting.

[AtticusFinch]

any witnesses from the past can be used IF you use their own words and cite them for reference.

[mledbetter]

any witnesses from the past can be used IF you use their own words and cite them for reference.

I guess the question I had in the back of my mind was, from a legal standpoint how do written records stack up in comparison to a real live witness?

Just curious.

-Matt

[Sevenbak]

2 questions first. Why have we been sequestered, and when is lunch arriving?

Also, I think the jury foreman is an ex-mo. How keeps passing notes about Jesus and Satan being brothers...

[Scottie]

Ladies and gentlemen of the jury.

The Book of Mormon has so many anachronisms that it is difficult to count just how many.

There is no way a submersible Jaredite barge could hold everything that it is claimed to have held for as long as it claimed to have held it.

The craftsmanship that would be necessary to build a sea faring vessel that would stay afloat on calm seas, let alone one that withstood a tremendous storm, would be unobtainable by one man. Even if the knowledge were available to him on how to engineer such a ship, there are precision eye/hand coordination's for many different areas of shipbuilding that take years, if not decades to master. (Referring to Nephi's ship, not the Jaradite barges... although it applies equally to them)

That's a good start, right?

[Alf O'Mega]

Hear ye, hear ye!

The Court of Common Opinion is in session.

Joseph Smith has been charged by the prosecution with the crime of forgery and fraud in foisting upon a credulous world a record he claims is ancient, said record being The Book of Mormon.

This being a criminal charge, the prosecution must prove its case beyond a reasonable doubt. Although the defense has no burden of proof in this trial, the defense may present any evidence it chooses at the close of the prosecution's case.

Ladies and gentlemen of the jury, you will now give your strict attention to the opening statement of the prosecutor . . .

Nolle prosequi.

For any parties who consider themselves harmed by the accused, I recommend group therapy in an online venue.

[rongo]

I guess the question I had in the back of my mind was, from a legal standpoint how do written records stack up in comparison to a real live witness?

Just curious.

-Matt

Written records can be really effective. For example, copies of the 1851 Pearl of Great Price with the revelation on the Civil War, World War I, etc. demonstrate that this revelation was published and publicized well before it began. This corroborates statements from Orson Pratt, Wilford Woodruff, etc. stating how this prophecy was mocked when they used it as missionaries in the decades preceding its publication. And there's the Pittsburgh Gazette editorial in the 1860s that printed section 87 and then said, "Have we not had a prophet among us?"

Generally, credible and competent live witnesses are preferred, but good documentation is also good.

[Sevenbak]

Ladies and gentlemen of the jury.

The Book of Mormon has so many anachronisms that it is difficult to count just how many.

There is no way a submersible Jaredite barge could hold everything that it is claimed to have held for as long as it claimed to have held it.

The craftsmanship that would be necessary to build a sea faring vessel that would stay afloat on calm seas, let alone one that withstood a tremendous storm, would be unobtainable by one man. Even if the knowledge were available to him on how to engineer such a ship, there are precision eye/hand coordination's for many different areas of shipbuilding that take years, if not decades to master. (Referring to Nephi's ship, not the Jaradite barges... although it applies equally to them)

That's a good start, right?

Not really.

1 Nephi 18:2

Now I, Nephi, did not work the timbers after the manner which was learned by men, neither did I build the ship after the manner of men; but I did build it after the manner which the Lord had shown unto me; wherefore, it was not after the manner of men.

Ether 2:16

And the Lord said: Go to work and build, after the manner of barges which ye have hitherto built. And it came to pass that the brother of Jared did go to work, and also his brethren, and built barges after the manner which they had built, according to the instructions of the Lord.

With God, all things are possible.... not all things, expect boats.

[gmormon]

... And there's the Pittsburgh Gazette editorial in the 1860s that printed section 87 and then said, "Have we not had a prophet among us?"...

Do you have a link for this?

[Mike Reed]

Ding dong!

Hello. We are missionaries of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

We testify to you that Prophet Joseph Smith was chosen by God to restore Christ's Church back to the earth today, and that he was further instructed by an angel named Moroni to translate an ancient divine record of gold plates, through the use of stones possessing supernatural powers.

Since we have come to your door to convince you of this is a positive affirmation, we fully understand that the burden of proof is upon our own shoulders (with the help of God, of course). Understandably, it would be unreasonable for us to insist that you prove a negativeâ?¦ especially, since it is our ultimate hope that you will join the Church.

So, with that being said... brothers and sisters, we ask you to listen to our testimony and message, which we know (through every fiber of our beings) to be true.

Let us begin.

[Scottie]

With God, all things are possible.... not all things, expect boats.

Oh, is the defense allowed to use the "with God all things are possible" argument?

If so, then there is no point to this thread.

[rongo]

Do you have a link for this?

Not at the moment, but it's cited in the introduction to Bushman's "Rough Stone Rolling."

[mledbetter]

Oh, is the defense allowed to use the "with God all things are possible" argument?

If so, then there is no point to this thread.

"God made me do it!"

[Sevenbak]

Oh, is the defense allowed to use the "with God all things are possible" argument?

If so, then there is no point to this thread.

I object, leading the witness!

Are you denying that both Nephi and the Bro. of Jared built their ships after the manner shown them by God, rather than by men?

A yes or no is sufficient.

[CV75]

Ladies and gentlemen of the jury, you will now give your strict attention to the opening statement of the prosecutor . . .

I will stand for no courtroom theatrics and grandstanding with incompetent, irrelevant, and immaterial arguments! (Hamilton Burger)

[Sevenbak]

Your honor, I request a recess, as I must drive to Provo and won't return until late this evening.

Carry on...

[Ceeboo]

Ceeboo, as a Catholic, you are ordered to testify in this matter.

Okee dokee Judge.

It is my OPINION that Mr. Smith should not be prosecuted in any way, shape or form.

My personal OPINION as to the " how " the Book of Mormon is with us is of no merit. The reality is that it is indeed with us.

I can tell you that millions of kind, loving, productive, generous folk revere the name of Joseph Smith and I can also tell you that these same people believe the B of M is indeed what Mr. Smith claims it to be. This, if nothing else, should shed some light as to how we should ( or should not ) cast our judgments.

Having said that, I am of the humble opinion that due to enormous respect and deep seated Sacred beliefs that many of our US tax paying citizens declare, we should at the very least, allow them the VERY SAME freedoms we expect to have.

In closing, I would encourage the Jury to call for an immediate mis-trial, drop all charges, and let this man rest in peace.

Peace,

Ceeboo

[Scottie]

I object, leading the witness!

Are you denying that both Nephi and the Bro. of Jared built their ships after the manner shown them by God, rather than by men?

A yes or no is sufficient.

No. But it is not sufficient. Allow me to explain, your honor.

As I said in my original post, even if God were to show them how to build a ship, the craftsmanship required for each of the MANY disciplines of shipbuilding would take years to master.

Lets try and put it a different way. Lets say that God appeared as a mortal man (kind of like Bruce/Evan Almighty) during the construction of this ship. He could not help build it, only detail to Nephi (and the small group that was with him) how to build a ship. So, in essence, God played the role of an experienced master tradesman for whichever part they were working on. Do you think that Nephi could have built a ship with such precision as to be storm worthy? I don't think it is possible.

Building a deep ocean vessel is a VERY hard thing to do. It's not like putting together a little fishing boat.

Perhaps I can put it a different way. Lets say I wanted to drywall my first house. I have a master drywaller standing by me, telling me how to tape and mud my walls. I can GUARANTEE you that I will do a shoddy job compared to what the master could do. There is too much that you cannot get except by sheer experience. Now magnify that to building an ocean crossing ship. There is no way.

[Mike Reed]

Ding dong!

Hello. We are missionaries of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

We testify to you that Prophet Joseph Smith was chosen by God to restore Christ's Church back to the earth today, and that he was further instructed by an angel named Moroni to translate an ancient divine record of gold plates, through the use of stones possessing supernatural powers.

Since we have come to your door to convince you of this is a positive affirmation, we fully understand that the burden of proof is upon our own shoulders (with the help of God, of course). Understandably, it would be unreasonable for us to insist that you prove a negativeâ?¦ especially, since it is our ultimate hope that you will join the Church.

So, with that being said... brothers and sisters, we ask you to listen to our testimony and message, which we know (through every fiber of our beings) to be true.

Let us begin.

Scottie? Will you give the opening prayer?

[sleepyhead]

Hear ye, hear ye!

The Court of Common Opinion is in session.

Joseph Smith has been charged by the prosecution with the crime of forgery and fraud in foisting upon a credulous world a record he claims is ancient, said record being The Book of Mormon.

This being a criminal charge, the prosecution must prove its case beyond a reasonable doubt. Although the defense has no burden of proof in this trial, the defense may present any evidence it chooses at the close of the prosecution's case.

Ladies and gentlemen of the jury, you will now give your strict attention to the opening statement of the prosecutor . . .

Hello consiglieri,

forgery ▸ noun: criminal falsification by making or altering an instrument with intent to defraud

▸ noun: a copy that is represented as the original

fraud ▸ noun: something intended to deceive; deliberate trickery intended to gain an advantage

▸ noun: intentional deception resulting in injury to another person

▸ noun: a person who makes deceitful pretenses

I don't think the major portion of anti-mormons claim that JS forged the b of M. We don't know who wrote it. Maybe he did and maybe he got it from someone else. There was no effort to make it look like an original of something else. Now the D of C is a forgery in the sense that lazy people may not know that the early revelations were changed from their original form in order to meet JS needs.

With regards to fraud there is nothing in the b of M which is promoting fraud. In fact there is a verse in the b of m regarding priestcraft which should have prevented what has happened in the organization he established.

Now if you want to change the initial trial venue to reflect a more accurate viewpoint of antimormons then I woudl be willing to play along.

[AtticusFinch]

Scottie, as was stated, one must not just give opinions, but give references to their claims. If you are allowed to simply give opinions, then the "God did it" response will be good enough, there is nothing to refute but your opinion.Everyone else, this is actually trying to be a serious thread with a hope of actiual study and learning. Can we have some order in this Court?

Sleepy,you are giving dictionary definitions, not the legal elements. Those were given on the Lawyer thread. This trial is using the legal elements of a fraud trial

[Scottie]

Scottie, as was stated, one must not just give opinions, but give references to their claims. If you are allowed to simply give opinions, then the "God did it" response will be good enough, there is nothing to refute but your opinion.Everyone else, this is actually trying to be a serious thread with a hope of actiual study and learning. Can we have some order in this Court?

Too much work. I bow out.

[mledbetter]

Scottie, as was stated, one must not just give opinions, but give references to their claims. If you are allowed to simply give opinions, then the "God did it" response will be good enough, there is nothing to refute but your opinion.Everyone else, this is actually trying to be a serious thread with a hope of actiual study and learning. Can we have some order in this Court?

Sleepy,you are giving dictionary definitions, not the legal elements. Those were given on the Lawyer thread. This trial is using the legal elements of a fraud trial

<whisper>Great, we have a Catholic judge. Can't wait to get to the "Great and Abominable Church" stuff. Then again, he is our "favorite" Catholic, so we might be okay.</whisper>