a little weird to think that you could point to a church that has 12 million members, find two nutjob serial killers, and use those two to argue that the church produces serial killers?

I mean, it'd be one thing if he could show a pattern of LDS serial killers. But come on, if I'm on a jury, I can't buy that argument for one second. How many early members of the church, who lived under the same leaders, DIDN'T kill anyone? Seems like that tells us a bit more.

I haven't read the book, so I don't really know if that's what he's trying to say, but it seems that way.