Now everything before the last comma seems like a fairly unbiased historical account. I believe full-well that Joseph completely doubted the ability of Thomas Ford to protect them from those who wished Joseph harm. What is completely unnecessary, IMO, is the last statement, "fully aware that they were guilty of no crimes." Regardless of governor Ford's intentions, Joseph and the other leaders were en route to stand trial for the "civil disturbance," which if I'm not mistaken was linked to the destruction of Thomas Sharp's printing press. Now, my beef is that Joseph MAY have been innocent, but he never stood trial so we don't have court documents or the official arguments from either side. Basically, we have no business saying Joseph, Hyrum, John, and the others were "guilty of no crimes." Were they innocent of their brutal murders at the hands of an angry mob? Absolutely! However, that's not what this statement claims, and I think it's a prime example of the whitewashing that has deeply damaged my trust in the CES.The governor of Illinois, Thomas Ford, wrote to Joseph Smith, insisting that the city council members stand trial before a non-Mormon jury on a charge of causing a civil disturbance. He said that only such a trial would satisfy the people. He promised the men complete protection, although the Prophet did not believe he could fulfill his pledge. When it appeared that there were no other alternatives, the Prophet, his brother Hyrum, John Taylor, and others submitted to arrest, fully aware that they were guilty of no crimes.
And hence, the reason I also currently dislike our emphasis on (biased) history in our lessons.