Joseph Smith Biography

Without Disclosing My True Identity

the real truth about Joseph’s life or work, the subject of plural marriage will not be dwelt
upon throughout the remainder of this biography. In brief, Joseph gave the people what
they wanted, but again, he never agreed to, nor did he support, the concept of plural
marriage; nor did he ever have intimate relations with any other woman besides Emma. The
detailed appendix provides the evidence and true facts to this brief explanation.

Claims of Fraud Against Joseph

An already shunned Lucy Harris filed a complaint against Joseph with the courts,^26
accusing him of fraud for taking her husband’s money. Of course, Martin did as he chose,
wanting to be as close as he could to Joseph. Back then, as it is today, the accusation of fraud
was more akin to a hearsay statement about another, the certain necessary elements of proof
to remove the features of mere disgruntlement from the accuser’s claim. In Joseph’s time, it
was generally defined as,

Deceit; deception; trick; artifice by which the right or interest of another is

injured; a stratagem intended to obtain some undue advantage; an attempt to

gain or the obtaining of an advantage over another by imposition or immoral

means, particularly deception in contracts, or bargain and sale, either by

stating falsehoods, or suppressing truth.^27

During the ensuing years, the definition of “fraud” has evolved in modern law.
Within the United States courts, it can be defined as follows:

A false representation of a matter of fact, whether by words or by conduct, by

false or misleading allegations, or by concealment of what should have been

disclosed, which deceives and is intended to deceive another so that he shall

act upon it to his legal injury.^28

Fraud must be proved by showing that the defendant’s actions involved five

separate elements: (1) a false statement of a material fact, (2) knowledge on the

part of the defendant that the statement is untrue, (3) intent on the part of the

defendant to deceive the alleged victim, (4) justifiable reliance by the alleged

victim on the statement, and (5) injury to the alleged victim as a result.^29

In light of the current legitimate definition of fraud, did Joseph make a false
statement of a material fact about having the plates and Urim and Thummim? Did he have
knowledge that there were no plates? Was Joseph’s intent for presenting the idea of the
plates and Urim and Thummim to deceive people? Did the people who believed Joseph’s
claims have a justifiable reliance on his statement or claims? If all of the preceding elements
were affirmative, and if people gave Joseph money as a result of his claims and their real
belief in them, was it an injury to them regardless of how Joseph used their money?

Envisioning Zion

In responding to these questions with the necessary detail, it is important to
understand that Joseph had every intention of introducing what would be known as the