I was hoping to see some specific works on Young (are you talking about Lion of the Lord by Stanley P. Hirshson?) Arrington's American Moses would be a very good start. If you think believe all of the Utah Territory and Church members did whatever Brigham Young told them to do, or were always honest with him you have some more reading to do. ;)
Oh, you mean specific like "Lion of the Lord: Biography of the Mormon Leader Brigham Young"? And have you read Mormon Conflict, and can thereby judge that it didn't deal quite a bit with Brigham Young's leadership style? And Quinn's books don't deal with Young's leadership style? Are you actually saying that unless I read Arrington's book, nothing else counts? Wow.
I certainly do not believe that "all of the Utah Territory and the Church members did whatever BY told them to do, or were always honest with him." What a bizarre suggestion, completely unrelated to what I actually said. But I will try to parse it out for you:
There were many members in the area who knew exactly who the killers were. Many of these members actually refused to have anything to do with the killing. Many of these members were active, faithful Mormons before and after the massacre. What you
are suggesting is that not a single one of these faithful members would have shared that information with BY, had he requested it.
I find that quite an extraordinary claim. So, again, what have you
read that suggested that BY invoked so little respect among so many faithful members, that not a single member would have provided this information to BY, had he requested it? I seriously doubt Arrington's book made such a suggestion. (by the way, I may have read Arrington's book but didn't recall with 100% certainty, so didn't offer it)
I think the people who really knew what happened swore not to tell. I don't think many people really knew what had happened, and those that did were sworn to secrecy. Things seem to be easier to evaluate looking back on it, but I would argue that at the time there were all sorts of stories circulating about the massacre, why it happened, etc. I see too many people here looking for soundbite answers to historical questions that would take much more time than I am willing to invest for their benefit on this subject.
To be specific, I have no doubt that certain people could lie to Brigham Young, yes.
Well, I have no doubt that certain people
could lie to BY either. But that's not what your scenario requires. It requires that not a single member - out of all the members in the area who knew who the killers were, even if they refused to be involved - would share that information with the prophet of the Lord, if so requested. Again, that is an extraordinary claim. Just what did you read in Arrington's book that suggested such a wide-spread disrespect for the prophet of God?