From: gclapp@javelin.sim.es.com (Glenn Clapp)
Subject: SLCM1192-1/5
Organization: Evans & Sutherland Corp.
Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1992 23:49:45 GMT


SALT LAKE CITY MESSENGER          (Issue #83 - November 1992)
Utah Lighthouse Ministry
Po Box 1884,
Salt Lake City, Utah 84110


      Mormon Leaders Suppress "Key" Item in Murder Case
  The True McLellin Documents Found in First Presidency's Vault!


        On October 15, 1985, a bomb exploded in Salt Lake City,
Utah, killing Steven F. Christensen, a Mormon bishop. Later that
morning, Kathleen Sheets, the wife of another bishop, was killed
when she picked up a package containing a booby-trapped shrapnel
bomb. The following day, a Mormon document dealer named Mark
Hofmann was seriously injured when a bomb exploded in his car.
After an intensive investigation, it was discovered that Mark
Hofmann was the bomber. Hofmann was transporting a third bomb he
had constructed at the time of the explosion. Although this bomb
was prepared to kill someone else, it accidentally went off in
his own car. Hofmann later confessed to the murders and was sent
to the Utah State Prison.

        In October, 1986, before Mr. Hofmann pleaded guilty, we
published the book, _Tracking the White Salamander_. About two
months after Mr. Hofmann pleaded guilty in 1987, we published a
second book, _Confessions of a White Salamander_. In these books
we discussed many important details regarding Hofmann's murders
and the forged documents he sold to the Mormon Church and other
collectors. Three other books were published the following year.
The first book to appear was _Salamander: The Story of the Mormon
Forgery Murders_, by Linda Sillitoe and Allen Roberts, two Mormon
historians. The second book was entitled, _Mormon Murders_, by
Steven Naifeh and Gregory White Smith. The last book, _A
Gathering of Saints: A True Story of Money, Murder and Deceit_,
was penned by Robert Lindsey, a reporter for the _New York
Times_.

        The authors of all three of these books interviewed
investigators and all reached the conclusion that some Mormon
leaders had not been forthright in their contacts with law
enforcement officials. In addition, they felt that the church had
been suppressing important documents from its members.

        The Mormon Church leaders were very disturbed about the
bad publicity and on September 18, 1988, the _Los Angeles Times_
reported that "sources within the Mormon media establishment...
said the church already has begun a battle against what it
believes is the most serious attack against the church since the
polygamy controversy... The church has embarked on a massive
study of the books and news articles in an attempt to assemble a
master list of errors misquotes and exaggerations. 'Our response
to all the allegations made against the church will be made
public in about 60 days,' [Richard P.] Lindsay said."

        Notwithstanding this public announcement, this "master
list of errors, misquotes and exaggerations" has never been made
public. Some time later, however, it was announced that Richard
E. Turley, Jr., managing director of the LDS Church Historical
Department, was writing a book which would give the church's side
of the issue. Mr. Turley's work has finally appeared under the
title, _Victims: The LDS Church and the Mark Hofmann Case_.

TURLEY'S BOMBSHELL!

        While Richard Turley seems to have nothing to say about
the two books we have written on the subject, he attacks all
three of the other books. He does, however, make observations
concerning our work on the Salamander letter and other
questionable documents. His comments with regard to our work are
generally good and contain nothing requiring a response.

        One strange thing about the Turley book is that although
the index lists thirteen different pages which refer to our work,
it does not have a single reference to the three books he is
attacking. Moreover, the names of the authors (Sillitoe, Roberts,
Naifeh, Smith and Lindsey) never appear in the index. It seems
that everything he has written about these authors is found in
the footnotes. Mr. Turley apparently does not want these authors
or their books to have more publicity than they have already
received.

        However this may be, in his footnotes Mormon apologist
Richard Turley tries to undermine the authenticity of these
books. He seems to be especially upset with charges that church
leaders were trying to cover up facts during the investigation
and does his best to try to smooth over these accusations.
Unfortunately for the Mormon Church, however, Mr. Turley's
laborious work of shoring up faith in church leaders comes
crashing to the ground when a person reaches page 248 of his
book. It is at that point that Turley divulges one of the most
embarrassing secrets that a Mormon historian has ever revealed.
Mr. Turley begins by saying that "March 1986 brought a startling
discovery." Turley goes on to explain that at that time church
officials became aware of the fact that they had an important
part of the McLellin collection concealed in the First
Presidency's vault and that it had been there since 1908!

        William E. McLellin was one of the original members of
the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles in the Mormon Church. He was
well acquainted with Joseph Smith and other church leaders and
knew a great deal about what was going on in the early church.
Later, however, he turned against the church and accused Joseph
Smith of altering the revelations which are found in the
_Doctrine and Covenants_. The current edition of the _Doctrine
and Covenants_ still contains an "Explanatory Introduction" which
purports to be the "Testimony of the Twelve Apostles to the Truth
of the Book of Doctrine and Covenants." According to Daniel
Macgregor, William McLellin claimed that this "testimony" was "a
base forgery." (_Changing of the Revelations_, page 32) McLellin
was very upset that Joseph Smith would change revelations given
by God. The _Salt Lake Tribune_ for Oct. 6, 1875, printed this
statement regarding McLellin: "His faith was first shaken by the
changes made in the revelations. He had been careful to keep
copies of the originals, presented proof that all the early
revelations were changed three times, and considerably amended
before they appeared in their present form."

        In 1838, Oliver Cowdery, one of the Three Witnesses to
the Book of Mormon, claimed that Joseph Smith had "A dirty,
nasty, filthy affair" with a young woman named Fanny Alger. (see
_Mormonism--Shadow or Reality?_ pages 203-204) William McLellin
claimed to have some explosive information on this matter. He
asserted that Joseph Smith's wife, Emma, had told him about this
affair. In his book, _Mormon Polygamy: A History_, 1986, page 6,
Richard S. Van Wagoner wrote: "McLellin's 1872 letter described
Alger's relationship with Joseph Smith. 'Again I told [your
mother],' the former apostle wrote, that 'I heard that one night
she missed Joseph and Fanny Alger. She went to the barn and saw
him and Fanny in the barn together alone. She looked through a
crack and saw the transaction!!! She told me this story too was
verily true.' McLellin also detailed the Alger incident to a
newspaper reporter for the 6 October 1875 _Salt Lake Tribune_."
In 1852 Mormon Church leaders acknowledged that Joseph Smith
practiced plural marriage, but they were silent concerning an
incident in the barn.

        Those who are familiar with the Hofmann case know that
Mark Hofmann falsely claimed that he had discovered the McLellin
collection and that he was helping the church obtain the
collection so that it would not fall into the hands of the
anti-Mormons who would use it to embarrass the church. Since
William McLellin had made some startling charges like the one
regarding the Fanny Alger affair, church leaders would naturally
be nervous concerning what such a collection might contain. In
his confession, Hofmann described a conversation he allegedly had
with Gordon B. Hinckley, a member of the church's First
Presidency, regarding the McLellin collection:

                "A. Well, of course, I basically told him that I
        could tell him what my fears were concerning its getting
        in to the enemy's hands, or whatever.... And his interest
        wasn't so much in having the Church obtain it as having
        it going someplace where--In fact, I would almost say he
        almost didn't want the Church to obtain it, he just
        wanted to make sure it did not fall in to the enemy's,
        hands which was good since I knew I didn't have it, I
        knew the Church couldn't obtain it." (_Hofmann's
        Confession_, page 529)

        Eventually, it was decided that Hugh Pinnock, a General
Authority in the Mormon Church, would help Mark Hofmann obtain a
loan of $185,000 from First Interstate Bank so that he could go
to Texas and obtain the McLellin collection. According to Richard
Turley, Pinnock felt that the collection required special
protection: "Pinnock offered to arrange for secure transportation
of the documents by jet or armored car, but Hofmann said he
would send them back to Utah by registered mail, adequately
insured." (_Victims_, page 124) The transaction was to be very
confidential. David E. Sorensen "who had recently been asked to
preside over the church's Canada Halifax Mission," would buy the
collection and hide it away from the enemies of the church.
Later, however, he would donate it to the church. Richard Turley
reported that "Sorensen later recalled that Pinnock 'asked if I
would listen to a matter of concern to the church and determine
if I would be in a position or interested in helping.'...
Sorensen recalled, 'Elder Pinnock was interested in seeing if I
might purchase the collection. If so, would I consider donating
it to the church at a later date.'... Sorensen later remembered
saying that he would be happy to help the church if he could but
wanted to 'investigate the matter in a business-like way.'"
(Ibid., page 136)

        Bishop Steven Christensen was supposed to authenticate
the McLellin collection for Sorensen on October 15, 1985. Since
Mr. Hofmann did not have the collection, he killed Steven
Christensen that morning so that the transaction could not take
place.

        When church leaders later discovered that they already
had the most significant part of the McLellin collection hidden
in the First Presidency's vault and that it had been there since
1908, they found themselves on the horns of a dilemma. If they
admitted that they had the collection all along, it would prove
the charge made by critics that the church suppressed important
documents from their people. In the _Salt Lake City Messenger_
for August 1985, we spoke of "the role that Mormon leaders have
taken in suppressing important documents." We noted that in 1983,
Gordon B. Hinckley, a member of the First Presidency of the
Mormon Church secretly acquired a letter -- later found to have
been forged by Mark Hofmann -- which purported to be in Joseph
Smith's own hand and linked the prophet to money-digging and
magic. President Hinckley believed the letter was authentic. He
paid Mr. Hofmann $15,000 for the letter and then hid it in the
First Presidency's vault.

        When researchers learned what happened and said that it
was being suppressed, the church decided to "stonewall." A
spokesman for the church said: "'The church doesn't have the
letter... It's not in the church archives or the First
Presidency's vault.'" (_Salt Lake Tribune_, April 29, 1985)
Finally, when it became clear that some Mormon scholars had
photocopies of the letter and were going to turn them over to the
news media, the church backed down, and the same spokesman
admitted his earlier statement was "in error": "The purported
letter was indeed acquired by the church. For the present it is
stored in the First Presidency's archives..." (_Salt Lake
Tribune_, May 7, 1985)

        In the issue of our newsletter cited above, we made this
observation: "The First Presidency's archive or vault, where the
1825 letter was concealed, is undoubtedly the ultimate 'black
hole.' Documents which are embarrassing to the Mormon Church
disappear into this bottomless abyss and are seldom heard of
again.

        The fact that church leaders could lose sight of the
McLellin collection in the First Presidency's vault for almost
eight decades shows just how dark it is inside the "black hole"
which contains the deeper secrets of Mormonism.

        The disappearance and rediscovery of the McLellin
collection would almost make one wonder if the right hand knows
what the left hand is doing at church headquarters. While Mormons
might expect this type of thing to happen at some bureaucratic
agency, they will have a difficult time explaining how this could
happen in a church which is supposed to be led by direct
revelation from God. The implications are very serious indeed.
For example, how can one explain the fact that Mormon leaders
were helping Mark Hofmann obtain a collection from Texas which
they already had in their own vault?

        In view of the circumstances, it would be very difficult
for church leaders to come forth and admit they had made such a
serious mistake. On the other hand, however, they faced a far
more serious problem if they did not reveal the existence of the
McLellin collection. To continue to suppress the existence of the
collection would mean that church leaders would have to
deliberately keep a key piece of evidence hidden from
investigators who were working on the Hofmann case. Unfortunately
for the Mormon Church, Richard Turley makes it very clear that
church leaders chose to keep law enforcement officials completely
in the dark concerning the existence of the McLellin collection.

        The importance of this piece of evidence cannot be
overstated. While investigators seemed to have a great deal of
evidence that Mark Hofmann forged documents and defrauded
investors in his schemes, they had a real problem establishing a
motive for the murders. At first some investigators believed that
the bombings might relate in some way to the Salamander letter.
(Hofmann had sold the Salamander letter to Steven Christensen for
a great deal of money.) This theory, however, could not be
confirmed by any evidence. Christensen apparently believed the
letter was genuine and seemed pleased that Hofmann had sold it to
him.

        The McLellin collection, on the other hand, seemed to
provide an explanation for the murder of Steven Christensen.
Hofmann's reluctance to produce the collection was very upsetting
to Christensen. Since Hofmann did not have the collection, there
was nothing he could do except to continue to give Mr.
Christensen excuses. Consequently, friction continued to mount
between the two men. At Hofmann's preliminary hearing, Curt Bench
said that about three weeks before the murders, Steven
Christensen called him and wanted him to convey a message to Mark
Hofmann. Bench testified that Christensen told him that "a member
of the First Quorum of Seventy and an apostle... were upset
because Mark had defaulted on a loan to a bank and had written a
check and the check had bounced... They were quite upset over
this and said some very serious things could happen as a result
of that not being taken care of."

        Curt Bench went on to say: "Steve told me that various
things could occur if Mark didn't make good and some of them were
he would certainly lose his credibility and credit with the
Church and with President Hinckley, that criminal action could be
taken, that he could conceivably go to jail, he could also be
sued by the bank or even by the Church if the Church was sued. He
could lose his membership in the Church.... It was very serious.
And Steve wanted me to convey that to Mark..." Bench also
testified that "Steve used the term crook" when referring to
Hofmann. (_Tracking the White Salamander_, page 24)

        Investigators did not believe that Mark Hofmann had the
McLellin collection to turn over to Mr. Christensen and felt that
this was Hofmann's motive for killing Christensen--by getting rid
of Christensen he could buy some time. They could not, however,
actually prove that Hofmann did not have the documents hidden
away some place. There was no way to know for certain. If Mr.
Hofmann should produce the collection at the time of his trial,
it would destroy the motive for murder and could ruin the murder
case. The Mormon Church, of course, had the vital information
needed by prosecutors in the First Presidency's vault. Church
leaders knew that there was no way that Mark Hofmann could
produce McLellin's diaries because they already had them. It is
plain, therefore, that Mormon Church leaders were suppressing
some of the most important evidence in the entire case!

        A close examination of Richard Turley' s book shows that
Mormon Church leaders were engaged in a conspiracy of silence
with regard to the McLellin collection to save the church's
image. The following quotations from Turley's book make this very
clear:

                "March 1986 brought a startling discovery.
        Historical Department personnel seeking information about
        William McLellin had contacted Dean Jessee.... Jessee
        visited the department and explained to Glenn Rowe that
        he had found some interesting information about McLellin
        in his research files. Jessee's notes referred to
        correspondence in the department's uncatalogued Joseph
        F. Smith collection. The correspondence mentioned
        McLellin's diaries and other belongings.... Rowe and his
        staff searched the collection and located letters that
        amazed church officials.

                "The first letter had been written by J. L.
        Traughber of Doucette, Texas... Dated January 13, 1908,
        and addressed to the librarian of the church, the letter
        explained that Traughber had an original copy of _A Book
        of Commandments_.... what Traughber offered next was even
        rarer. He wrote, 'I also have the Journal, in part, of
        Elder W.E. McLellin for the years 1831,2,3,4,5,6.'
        Traughber said he had tried to get more of the journal
        from McLellin's widow, but she had refused to give them
        up 'as she said she did not want some things to be
        known.' Traughber said he also had some manuscript books
        that McLellin had written.... and offered to sell them
        for fifty dollars.

                "On January 18, 1908, President Joseph F. Smith
        and his counselors wrote to President Samuel O. Bennion
        of the Central States Mission. The Presidency...
        instructed Bennion on how to handle the offer: 'While we
        have studiously avoided expressing any particular desire
        on our part to purchase the things mentioned by Mr.
        Traughber, we desire you to know that we would like very
        much to possess McClellan's [sic] Journal, if for no
        other reason than to prevent the writings of this
        unfortunate and erratic man, whose attitude after his
        apostacy was inimical to the Prophet Joseph Smith, from
        falling into unfriendly hands; and for this reason alone,
        we feel quite willing to pay the price asked for these
        things...' The Presidency also suggested that Bennion
        contact McLellin's widow to obtain the rest of the
        journals, even if their acquisition were to cost another
        fifty dollars.

                "The letter to Bennion mentioned an interview
        Joseph F. Smith and another church leader had had with
        McLellin in 78, when McLellin had told them he had
        writings he wished to publish. The Presidency wrote
        Bennion that the manuscripts... might be the same ones
        McLellin had mentioned in 1878. 'We hope they are,' the
        First Presidency wrote, 'as it would be an act of mercy
        on our part to purchase them, and thus prevent them from
        being published by unfriendly hands to the injury of
        innocent people.'

                "Rowe and his staff also found a February 12,
        1908, response from Bennion to the First Presidency.
        Bennion reported that he... had acquired the proffered
        materials from Traughber.... He said he would send all
        the acquired items to the First Presidency that day by
        registered mail.

                "Rowe had kept his new supervisor, Richard
        Turley, informed about Jessee's clue and the letters to
        which it led. Turley told Dean Larsen about the letters,
        and Larsen informed [apostles] Packer and Oaks, who in
        turn contacted the First Presidency. When Gordon Hinckley
        learned of the letters, he asked Francis Gibbons if the
        First Presidency's vault contained the items the letters
        mentioned. Gibbons searched the Vault. Hinckley and the
        other church officials then learned to their
        astonishment, that the church had owned McLellin's
        journals and manuscripts all along.

                "The journals... revealed a man deeply dedicated
        to his religion....

                "The little manuscript books, on the other hand,
        typified the later McLellin, an avowed enemy of the
        church....

                "Like the materials the Tribune had discovered,
        the McLellin items found in church possession were not
        the McLellin collection touted by Hofmann.... Unlike the
        Tribune's discovery, however, the church's McLellin
        materials included a key item from the collection Hofmann
        claimed to have bought. That item, McLellin's early
        journals, confirmed to church officials that Hofmann was
        a fraud.

                "The discovered documents did not fall within any
        of the subpoenas issued to the church, and thus officials
        were not legally obligated to mention them to anyone.
        Still, it was apparent they were relevant to the case,
        and those involved in the discovery felt the documents'
        existence should be revealed. Yet disclosing them would
        not come without a cost. Church officials had sought to
        dispel the notion that they were buying documents to hide
        them. Disclosure of the newly discovered McLellin
        materials, however, would reinforce notions of church
        suppression because those documents had in fact been
        bought at the direction of the First Presidency and
        locked away nearly eight decades earlier, eventually to
        be forgotten.... Alluding in his journal to the day's
        remarkable discovery, [Apostle] Oaks wrote, 'Today [Boyd
        K. Packer] & I learned that the Church has some documents
        that have been unknown until now, but will be of great
        intrest when they are revealed, as they should be prior
        to the Hoffmann trial (in my opinion).'

                "What church officials did not know was that
        there would be no trial." (-Victims: The LDS Church and
        the Mark Hofmann Case_, pages 248-251)

        This is a shocking disclosure to be coming from the pen
of Richard Turley, managing director of the LDS Church Historical
Department. As the reader will see from the quotation above, Mr.
Turley acknowledges that he himself became aware of the fact that
the church had the McLellin collection in March 1986. Although
Turley practiced law before becoming a historian, he obvious felt
it was more important to protect the church than to tell
investigators working on the Hofmann case about this important
matter. The church continued to suppress knowledge of the
collection for six years after it was rediscovered.

        Why Turley would reveal the matter at this time is a
matter of speculation. It could be that Mr. Turley was bothered
by his role in the matter and felt compelled to bring out the
truth. On the other hand, there could have been concern that too
many people knew what had happened and that the "enemies of the
church" would eventually find out about the cover-up and publish
the facts to the world. When Mormon leaders are convinced that
something embarrassing is about to leak out, they sometimes try
to get the information out first. For example, the Mormon Church
at first denied that the 1825 letter existed, but then rushed to
print it when it was discovered that scholars were preparing to
release it to the press. In any case, we are very pleased that
Mr. Turley has revealed this information.

        After Mormon historian Dean Jessee reported the existence
of the correspondence mentioning the McLellin collection, a
number of people became aware of the fact that the church had
obtained the collection. Church archivist Glenn Rowe received the
information from Jessee. Rowe, in turn, reported the matter to
Richard Turley and Turley relayed the information to Dean Larsen.
Larsen then informed apostles Boyd K Packer and Dallin H. Oaks
about the matter. These two apostles "contacted the First
Presidency." The First Presidency is composed of President Ezra
Taft Benson (the Prophet, Seer and Revelator of the church),
President Gordon B. Hinckley and President Thomas S. Monson.
Francis Gibbons was the one who finally found the McLellin
collection in the vault. In addition, members of Glenn Rowe's
staff also knew about the matter.

        Although at least a dozen people knew about the McLellin
collection, no one seems to have reported the matter to
investigators. Those on the lower levels may have felt that
church leaders would tell police that the McLellin collection
had been found. Instead, the highest leaders of the church
chose to remain silent and put the church in a cover-up
situation. Since the church is supposed to have a "living
prophet," one would think that he would point out that the
information must be reported to investigators.

        Furthermore, Apostle Dallin H. Oaks had enough legal
knowledge that he should have demanded that a full report be
immediately turned over to the police. Richard Turley says that
Apostle Oaks "served as a United States Supreme Court clerk,
University of Chicago law professor, American Bar Foundation
executive director, Brigham Young University president, and Utah
Supreme Court justice." (_Victims_, page 116) Mr. Turley also
stales that "Oaks's experience as a lawyer and judge made him
sensitive to investigators' need for any information that might
help solve a crime..." (Ibid., page 163)

        On page 171 of the same book, Turley reports that after
the bombings, Shannon Flynn came to church headquarters and
talked with Apostle Oaks. Flynn wanted to know what to tell
investigators. Oaks responded, "'As soon as I learned that Mark
Hofmann had been the object of a bomb, I knew that I had some
facts that would help police.... I talked to two F.B.I. agents. I
told them everything I knew about it. The Church is going to
cooperate fully and it has absolutely nothing to hide. Sometimes
there are some confidential transactions but this is a murder
investigation. Confidentiality is set aside. We will cooperate
fully.'"

        On page 153, Turley tells of Mark Hofmann coming to
Apostle Oaks' office: "Hofmann said he thought bombing
investigators might want to question him. He worried about what
to tell them. Oaks told him to tell the truth.... Oaks said that
as far as he knew, Hofmann's activities with the McLellin
collection, though confidential... had nothing to do with the
bombing investigation. Police probably would not ask him about
the deal. If they did, he should answer truthfully and
completely."

        Richard Turley shows that Oaks also gave Alvin Rust
similar advice: "[Martell] Bird recorded, 'He told Brother Rust
that he should tell the truth in every instance, and that he
should not be worried at all about the Church, because when the
facts all come out, the Church will have no need to be
embarrassed..." (page 175)

        On December 11, 1985, Apostle Oaks addressed members of
the Historical Department. According to Turley, Oaks encouraged
employees to be forthright: "Of the bombing investigation, he
said, 'We are like others in that we must cooperate fully in an
investigation and tell the truth on all matters material to that
investigation.'" (page 226) While at first Apostle Oaks claimed
that he told the F.B.I. "everything I knew" about the Hofmann
case and freely gave advice to others about how they should be
completely honest and provide all relevant information to
investigators, when he realized that the church would be
embarrassed by the truth, he clammed up just like the other
church leaders. While Richard Turley claimed that "Oaks's
experience as a lawyer and judge made him sensitive to
investigators' need for any information that might help solve a
crime," when he saw the church was in danger, he put a bridle on
his tongue and joined in the conspiracy of silence.

        The reader will remember that Turley quoted this
statement from Apostle Oaks' journal on the day that the McLellin
collection was discovered: "Today [Boyd K. Packer] & I learned
that the Church has some documents that have been unknown until
now, but will be of great interest when they are revealed, as
they should be prior to the Hoffmann trial (in my opinion)."

        While Turley seems to feel that this entry shows Oaks'
openness, it seems to foreshadow the possibility of a cover- up.
The reader will note, for example, that Oaks does not mention the
fact that he is talking about the Mclellin collection. He merely
states: "I learned that the Church has some documents..." Why
would he hesitate to identify the documents? If Turley had not
revealed that Oaks was talking about the McLellin collection, a
person reading his diary today would not know what he was talking
about and would assume that whatever the documents were, they had
been made available.

        Apostle Oaks' statement that "when they are revealed, as
they should be prior to the Hofmann trial (in my opinion)" seems
to suggest that there was a possibility that they would not be
revealed prior to the trial. (They, of course, would be of no
value to prosecutors after the trial.) The words, "in my opinion"
seem to imply that if the other church leaders did not want them
available, Oaks would support the decision.

        If the church had no plans for a cover-up, Apostle Oak
would have written something like the following: "Today I learned
the Church has had the McLellin collection stored in a vault
since 1908. Since this is very important to the Hofmann case, we
have called the county prosecutor and informed him of this
development. He will pick up the documents in the morning."

        Oaks' statement that the documents should be revealed
"prior to the Hofmann trial" certainly raises an important
question. By March 4, 1986, the day Oaks made the entry in his
journal, church leaders were well aware of the fact that
prosecutors were preparing for Mark Hofmann's preliminary
hearing. If the prosecution could not produce sufficient
evidence at that hearing, Hofmann would be set free and there
would be no trial. For this reason investigators were working
feverishly to obtain the evidence necessary to be sure that
Hofmann would be bound over for trial. The fact that the Mormon
Church had rediscovered the McLellin collection would have been
extremely important to their case.

        Since Apostle Oaks did not mention anything about
revealing the McLellin collection "prior to the Hofmann trial,"
it is obvious that church leaders were planning to keep it
suppressed at least through the preliminary hearing. The
preliminary hearing did not start until April 14, 1986. This gave
church leaders almost a month and a half to turn over the
McLellin collection to investigators. Instead of coming clean,
however, they chose to keep the documents hidden. The General
Authorities of the church were already concerned enough about the
bad publicity the church would receive during the preliminary
hearing and must have hoped that no trial would ever occur. This,
of course, is exactly what happened and the church never had to
reveal the truth about the McLellin collection to investigators.

        Since Salt Lake County prosecutors did not have the
important piece of evidence that the church could have provided,
their case on the murders was not as strong as it could have
been. They were obviously concerned about the strength of their
case. Robert Lindsey reported the following: "At the end of a
week of testimony, David Biggs [one of the prosecutors] wrote in
his journal: 'I really feel as if we've missed the "glue" that
connects the pieces of this puzzle together. The pieces don't
seem to want to stay together. We have evidence, motive, murder,
but it is all just a degree off. I'm still trying to find out
what the problem is.'" (_A Gathering of Saints: A True Story of
Money, Murder and Deceit_, page 317)

        As we have already shown, Richard Turley has admitted
that the McLellin collection in the church vault "included a key
item" which "confirmed to church officials that Hofmann was a
fraud." Turley also acknowledged that "it was apparent they [the
McLellin documents] were relevant to the case, and those involved
in the discovery felt the documents' existence should be
revealed." A person certainly does not have to be a lawyer to
know that the church should have immediately made these documents
available.

        Church leaders had publicly stressed how they were
cooperating with investigators. In the beginning, the church
officials pledged "'our fullest cooperation with city county and
federal authorities in the investigation.'" (_Victims_, page 165)
Hugh Pinnock, the General Authority who helped Hofmann obtain the
loan for $185,000, wrote a letter to Steven Christensen's widow
in which he said: "'Several of us have talked with law
enforcement people. We want them to know whatever is relevant.'"
(Ibid, page 176)

        On October 19, 1985, "the church issued its news
release... 'From the outset of this investigation,' the release
noted, 'the Church has cooperated fully with federal, state, and
local law enforcement officials, responding to every inquiry and
request. The Church will continue to cooperate with law
enforcement officials to bring to light any facts that may
contribute to this investigation."' (page 177)
-- 
=============================================================================
= Glenn Clapp                          |  gclapp@thunder.sim.es.com         =
= Evans and Sutherland Computer Corp.  |  My opinions are my own, but then  =
= Salt Lake City, Utah  (801) 582-5847 |  that's my opinion.                =
Newsgroups: talk.religion.misc