On The Third Day She Rose Again – Arizona Highways
Fact-checking Matt Jaffe’s Account of Aimee Semple McPherson’s 1926 Reappearance in Douglas
Article reviewed: “On The Third Day She Rose Again”
Author: Matt Jaffe
Publication: Arizona Highways
Published: February 2026
Link: arizonahighways.com/archive/issues/chapter/Doc.1506.Chapter.8
Arizona Highways tells the Douglas portion of Aimee Semple McPherson’s story unusually well. The article reconstructs the atmosphere of Douglas and Agua Prieta, the media frenzy that followed Aimee’s reappearance, the enormous local response, and the importance of the event in Arizona history. Its broader biographical account of McPherson is also substantially accurate.
The problems begin when the article moves from telling what happened in Douglas to telling readers what supposedly happened during Aimee’s disappearance. At that point, disputed prosecution allegations are repeatedly presented with more certainty than the historical record permits. Important witnesses favorable to Aimee are omitted. Evidence contradicting the skeptical narrative is left out. And two claims—the statement that Aimee returned “three days after her funeral” and that she and others were “indicted”—are simply wrong.
Most significantly for an Arizona publication, the article overlooks one of the strongest Arizona witnesses in the entire case: Douglas Constable O. A. Ash. Ash did not speculate about what happened at Venice Beach. He did not claim to know where Aimee spent every day of her disappearance. He testified about what he personally saw and investigated in the Douglas–Agua Prieta region.
Central Claims
Arizona Highways claims: Aimee appeared in Douglas “three days after her funeral.”
The record shows: There was no funeral. Memorial services were held at Angelus Temple on June 20 because no body had been recovered. Indeed, the article itself states only a few sentences later that the Los Angeles coroner refused to issue a death certificate and that the gatherings were memorial services.
Arizona Highways claims: Aimee’s condition, clothing and shoes were inconsistent with the journey she described.
The record shows: Career law-enforcement officer Constable O. A. Ash personally observed swollen ankles, blistered feet, damaged stockings, a torn dress pocket, and burned, welted and swollen wrists and arms. He also traversed the same country himself and explained why clothing and shoes need not have been badly damaged.
Arizona Highways claims: “No shack matching her description was found.”
The record shows: Contemporary reports document Ash announcing on June 26 that his search party had located a shack about eighteen miles southeast of Agua Prieta that he said corresponded with Aimee’s description. Later investigation located a miner’s cabin where an opened oil can and strips of material consistent with her account of cutting her restraints were found.
Arizona Highways claims: Footprints suggested Aimee had actually arrived by automobile.
The record shows: That was one official’s interpretation. Ash and his party, which included an experienced tracker, reported back-trailing Aimee for miles through disturbed grass, displaced stones and footprints matching her shoes.
Arizona Highways claims: “More damning evidence” showed Aimee had “shacked up for 10 days” with Kenneth Ormiston at Carmel.
The record shows: Carmel was an allegation, not an established fact. Witness descriptions conflicted dramatically, several witnesses rejected Aimee as Ormiston’s companion, and investigators obtained no fingerprint identification placing Aimee inside the cottage.
Arizona Highways claims: Aimee, Minnie Kennedy and Kenneth Ormiston “were eventually indicted.”
The record shows: The Los Angeles County grand jury heard testimony but returned no indictment. Several weeks later, the district attorney’s office filed a criminal complaint. The distinction is explicit even in the Los Angeles Times retrospective account of the case.
Arizona Highways claims: The district attorney dropped the charges because a guilty verdict appeared unattainable.
The record shows: That leaves out the most important reason. District Attorney Asa Keyes publicly admitted that his principal conspiracy witness, Lorraine Wiseman-Sielaff, had changed her story so repeatedly that no prosecutor could vouch for her credibility. Keyes said that without her testimony, proof of the alleged conspiracy was impossible.
Accurate Sources
- https://sisteraimee.org/writings/the-verdict-is-in/
- https://sisteraimee.org/witnesses/true-witnesses/constable-ash/