Fact Check: the author of the Book of Mormon was a convicted conman

Published May 22, 2025
VERDICT
False

# The Claim: "The author of the Book of Mormon was a convicted conman" ## Introduction The assertion that Joseph Smith, the founder of the Church of ...

The Claim: "The author of the Book of Mormon was a convicted conman"

Introduction

The assertion that Joseph Smith, the founder of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (LDS Church) and the author of the Book of Mormon, was a "convicted conman" has been a point of contention in discussions about his life and the legitimacy of his religious claims. This claim suggests that Smith's legal troubles and alleged fraudulent activities reflect on his character and the authenticity of his religious texts. However, the term "convicted conman" requires careful examination, as it implies a legal conviction that may not be substantiated by historical records.

What We Know

  1. Legal Troubles: Joseph Smith was indeed involved in numerous legal issues during his lifetime. According to various sources, he faced approximately thirty criminal charges and was arrested at least 42 times across several states, including New York, Ohio, Missouri, and Illinois 12. However, the nature of these charges varied widely, including allegations related to financial misconduct and religious practices.

  2. Convictions: While Smith was arrested multiple times, the evidence regarding actual convictions is less clear. A source from Medium states that while Smith's activities raised questions about his character, he was "almost certainly not officially found guilty" of being a conman 3. This suggests that while he was charged, he may not have been convicted in a court of law.

  3. Fraud Allegations: Critics often cite Smith's involvement in treasure hunting and the use of "peep stones" as evidence of fraudulent behavior. Some accounts describe him as having testified under oath about his supposed ability to locate treasure, which could be interpreted as fraudulent 67. However, the context of these activities and their legal implications remain debated.

  4. Historical Context: The term "conman" implies a level of deceit and intent to defraud, which requires a nuanced understanding of Smith's actions. Some sources label him as a "con artist" based on his treasure-seeking activities and the controversial nature of his religious claims 410. However, these characterizations often reflect the biases of the sources, which may have religious or ideological agendas.

Analysis

The claim that Joseph Smith was a "convicted conman" raises several important questions about the reliability of the sources and the interpretations of his actions:

  • Source Credibility: The Wikipedia entry on Joseph Smith provides a broad overview of his legal troubles but lacks detailed citations for specific claims about convictions 12. While Wikipedia can be a useful starting point, it is important to corroborate its claims with primary sources or more authoritative secondary sources.

  • Bias and Agenda: Sources like the Medium article 3 and the FAIR organization 8 aim to provide a balanced view but may still reflect biases based on their affiliations with or opposition to the LDS Church. The portrayal of Smith as a conman is often influenced by the ideological stance of the authors, which can affect the objectivity of their analyses.

  • Methodological Concerns: The evidence presented in various sources often relies on anecdotal accounts or interpretations of Smith's actions rather than concrete legal documentation. For instance, while some sources assert that Smith was convicted, they do not provide specific court records or legal documents to substantiate these claims 49.

  • Need for Additional Information: To fully assess the validity of the claim, it would be beneficial to have access to primary legal documents from Smith's trials, including court records and verdicts. Additionally, a comprehensive historical analysis that includes perspectives from both critics and defenders of Smith would provide a more nuanced understanding of his character and actions.

Conclusion

Verdict: False

The claim that Joseph Smith was a "convicted conman" is misleading. While he faced numerous legal challenges and was arrested multiple times, the evidence does not support the assertion that he was ever officially convicted of being a conman. Sources indicate that he was "almost certainly not officially found guilty" of such charges, which complicates the characterization of his actions as fraudulent.

It is essential to recognize that the term "conman" carries connotations of deceit and intent to defraud, which require careful consideration of the context and motivations behind Smith's actions. Many sources that label him as such may be influenced by ideological biases, which can skew interpretations of his character.

Moreover, the available evidence is limited, primarily relying on anecdotal accounts and interpretations rather than concrete legal documentation. Access to primary legal records would be necessary for a more comprehensive understanding of Smith's legal history.

Readers are encouraged to critically evaluate information and consider multiple perspectives when assessing historical claims, particularly those involving complex figures like Joseph Smith.

Sources

  1. Joseph Smith and the criminal justice system - Wikipedia. Link
  2. Joseph Smith and the criminal justice system - Wikipedia. Link
  3. Fact-checking Mormon History: was Joseph Smith a Convicted Con Man. Link
  4. Joseph Smith Was A Con-Artist, Impostor, Necromancer. Link
  5. Joseph Smith: Nineteenth Century Con Man? - Sidney Rigdon. Link
  6. Joseph Smith was a con man - Religions Wiki. Link
  7. Joseph Smith and Fraud Allegations. Link
  8. Legal Trials of the Prophet: Joseph Smith's Life in Court - FAIR. Link
  9. Was Joseph Smith a Convicted Conman? - Saints Unscripted. Link
  10. Three Irrefutable Reasons Why Joseph Smith Was a Fraud. Link

Have a claim you want to verify? It's 100% Free!

Our AI-powered fact-checker analyzes claims against thousands of reliable sources and provides evidence-based verdicts in seconds. Completely free with no registration required.

💡 Try:
"Coffee helps you live longer"
100% Free
No Registration
Instant Results

Comments

Leave a comment

Loading comments...

More Fact Checks to Explore

Discover similar claims and stay informed with these related fact-checks

🔍
Partially True
🎯 Similar

Fact Check: Transcript 00:00 For all of their strutting about protesting that they support democracy. Not a one of them gave a damn about democracy when they pulled Biden off the ballot and dropped Kamala Harris in without a single Democrat primary voter voting for him. And you know what? Not a single Democrat is here today because not a single one of them gives a damn about the fact that they lied to the American people for four years. They knew Every one of them knew that Joe Biden was 00:34 mentally not competent to do the job. The White House Press Secretary. She knew when she stood in front of the American people and lied over and over and over again and they're not here because they can't defend themselves. It wasn't a surprise for four years the White House hid President Biden from Republican Senators. Would not let him meet with us. He served 40 years in this body. We all know him. And they deliberately lied and by the way Jake Tapper had a bombshell 01:08 book exposing the incredible scandal that Biden's mental decline was covered up by Jake Tapper. There's a Yiddish word and that truly is how dare we lie and cover up what we all knew. Now I have been asked literally a thousand times by Texans. Was running the country? And I'm going to give 01:40 you the most terrifying answer. I don't know. I genuinely don't know. And not a single Democrat here cares. The most telling proof of Biden's decline came with the signature of the president. The symbol of executive authority that was outsourced to a machine. Mister Wald you're a lawyer who served in the White House Council's Office. You understand the gravity of presidential action. Does the president's signature 02:10 carry legal and constitutional weight under article two? Yes. Is the act of signing an executive order or signing a law or granting a pardon a delegable duty of the president. Uh so in that opinion in 2005 from OLC they said essentially that an autopin could be used by a subordinate but the president's determination as to sign the document can never be delegated. Can that authority 02:41 be transferred to a staff or a machine without the president's explicit authorization? Never. And if you look at the statistics, the statistics are stunning. In 2021, President Biden issued 78 executive orders. None were signed with an auto pen. That first year the presidency, Biden I suppose was relatively lucid and 78 executive orders he signed by hand. The second year, however, we see the auto pen emerged. 03:15 The first auto pen executive order was issued on 15th 2022. After that day 100% of the executive orders issued in 2022 were signed by an autopen. In 2023 Biden issued twenty-four executive orders. 16 were auto penned. In 20twenty-four Biden issued 19. 14 were auto penned. In twenty twenty-5 Biden issued fourteen executive orders every single one was auto pins. 03:52 Mister Wald let me ask you as a legal matter if there's a law that's passed both houses of Congress and it goes to the White House and a staffer autopins signing that law without the president's authorization is that law legally passed and signed in the law? No. If an executive order is issued and a staffer autopins it without the president's authorization, is that executive order legally binding? No. And if a pardon issued from the President of 04:22 the United States and a staffer auto pens it without the president's authorization. Is that pardon legally binding? No. Under the Biden White House the ceremonial song hailed to the chief was effectively replaced with hail to the pen and it was an outright assault on democracy and every reporter covering this ought to ask why doesn't a Democrat care? We heard about the moral responsibilities of a staffer. 04:54 How about an elected senator who knows damn well that if we get into a war and Iran is preparing to fire a nuclear weapon at the United States that the commander in chief is busy playing with his jello and he's not competent to defend ourselves and every member of the cabinet, the chief of staff, the press secretary, and the members of Congress who lied about this on a daily basis with the press's complicity. They are all responsible for subverting democracy. Angry Ted Cruz is perhaps my favorite version of 05:27 Ted Cruz because when he's getting history on it, you might want to take a listen. He is definitely angry that there's some acting going on here in the line of hail to the chief change from hail to the pen that's not a smart line but it's still the truth. The truth is in this video right here ladies and gentlemen. The change in the way Joe Biden used the autopin is a steady upward moving graph from twenty twenty-one to the end of his presidency in early twenty 05:58 twenty-five. Okay? That is a noticeable issue. And if he does not directly authorize the autopin we've got We've got grounds to go through every single law Joe Biden has signed that way and perhaps ignore them all together. There's way more evidence behind the autopin theory and hopefully it ends up sticking. I I hope it does because I think this is in a way worse than the Bill Clinton perjury case. Cuz Bill 06:28 Clinton basically lied before Congress lied directly to the American people lied under oath. This is worse in a way. Because lying under oath means that you know where the truth is and you're just hoping to get away with it and there's a direct law. This however Signing with the auto pin is more opaque. It is an ultimate he said she said and you're dont rate the opinion oo just fact if there is

Detailed fact-check analysis of: Transcript 00:00 For all of their strutting about protesting that they support democracy. Not a one of them gave a damn about democracy when they pulled Biden off the ballot and dropped Kamala Harris in without a single Democrat primary voter voting for him. And you know what? Not a single Democrat is here today because not a single one of them gives a damn about the fact that they lied to the American people for four years. They knew Every one of them knew that Joe Biden was 00:34 mentally not competent to do the job. The White House Press Secretary. She knew when she stood in front of the American people and lied over and over and over again and they're not here because they can't defend themselves. It wasn't a surprise for four years the White House hid President Biden from Republican Senators. Would not let him meet with us. He served 40 years in this body. We all know him. And they deliberately lied and by the way Jake Tapper had a bombshell 01:08 book exposing the incredible scandal that Biden's mental decline was covered up by Jake Tapper. There's a Yiddish word and that truly is how dare we lie and cover up what we all knew. Now I have been asked literally a thousand times by Texans. Was running the country? And I'm going to give 01:40 you the most terrifying answer. I don't know. I genuinely don't know. And not a single Democrat here cares. The most telling proof of Biden's decline came with the signature of the president. The symbol of executive authority that was outsourced to a machine. Mister Wald you're a lawyer who served in the White House Council's Office. You understand the gravity of presidential action. Does the president's signature 02:10 carry legal and constitutional weight under article two? Yes. Is the act of signing an executive order or signing a law or granting a pardon a delegable duty of the president. Uh so in that opinion in 2005 from OLC they said essentially that an autopin could be used by a subordinate but the president's determination as to sign the document can never be delegated. Can that authority 02:41 be transferred to a staff or a machine without the president's explicit authorization? Never. And if you look at the statistics, the statistics are stunning. In 2021, President Biden issued 78 executive orders. None were signed with an auto pen. That first year the presidency, Biden I suppose was relatively lucid and 78 executive orders he signed by hand. The second year, however, we see the auto pen emerged. 03:15 The first auto pen executive order was issued on 15th 2022. After that day 100% of the executive orders issued in 2022 were signed by an autopen. In 2023 Biden issued twenty-four executive orders. 16 were auto penned. In 20twenty-four Biden issued 19. 14 were auto penned. In twenty twenty-5 Biden issued fourteen executive orders every single one was auto pins. 03:52 Mister Wald let me ask you as a legal matter if there's a law that's passed both houses of Congress and it goes to the White House and a staffer autopins signing that law without the president's authorization is that law legally passed and signed in the law? No. If an executive order is issued and a staffer autopins it without the president's authorization, is that executive order legally binding? No. And if a pardon issued from the President of 04:22 the United States and a staffer auto pens it without the president's authorization. Is that pardon legally binding? No. Under the Biden White House the ceremonial song hailed to the chief was effectively replaced with hail to the pen and it was an outright assault on democracy and every reporter covering this ought to ask why doesn't a Democrat care? We heard about the moral responsibilities of a staffer. 04:54 How about an elected senator who knows damn well that if we get into a war and Iran is preparing to fire a nuclear weapon at the United States that the commander in chief is busy playing with his jello and he's not competent to defend ourselves and every member of the cabinet, the chief of staff, the press secretary, and the members of Congress who lied about this on a daily basis with the press's complicity. They are all responsible for subverting democracy. Angry Ted Cruz is perhaps my favorite version of 05:27 Ted Cruz because when he's getting history on it, you might want to take a listen. He is definitely angry that there's some acting going on here in the line of hail to the chief change from hail to the pen that's not a smart line but it's still the truth. The truth is in this video right here ladies and gentlemen. The change in the way Joe Biden used the autopin is a steady upward moving graph from twenty twenty-one to the end of his presidency in early twenty 05:58 twenty-five. Okay? That is a noticeable issue. And if he does not directly authorize the autopin we've got We've got grounds to go through every single law Joe Biden has signed that way and perhaps ignore them all together. There's way more evidence behind the autopin theory and hopefully it ends up sticking. I I hope it does because I think this is in a way worse than the Bill Clinton perjury case. Cuz Bill 06:28 Clinton basically lied before Congress lied directly to the American people lied under oath. This is worse in a way. Because lying under oath means that you know where the truth is and you're just hoping to get away with it and there's a direct law. This however Signing with the auto pin is more opaque. It is an ultimate he said she said and you're dont rate the opinion oo just fact if there is

Jul 27, 2025
Read more →