For many years the answer to this question was kept quiet but the concensus answer is that Pte-San-Hunka, or White Bull, the nephew of Sitting Bull, killed Custer.

White Bull told his story, which was verified by a great many of the warriors who were present, detailing that he and Custer fought in hand to hand combat. Eventually, Custer drew his pistol but White Bull took it from him before he could fire. He struck Custer upside the head several times and when the Lieutenant fell, White Bull shot him once in the head and once in the chest. White Bull had never seen Custer and did not know who it was he was facing off against but was told after the battle who it was.

White Bull refused to tell his story publicly, as many of the warriors refused to admit their deeds, because he feared there would be some form of vengeance upon he and his family by those who governed the reservations. Stanley Vestal, in his book "Sitting Bull: Champion of the Sioux" reveals the full story of White Bull and the fall of Custer.

Interestingly enough, David Humphreys Miller explains in his book "Custer's Fall: The Indian Side of the Story" that one Rodman Wanamaker of Philadelphia sought to answer the question in 1909. He offered a cash reward amongst the Sioux people if they could provide the information. The Sioux debated the matter and their people were starving, so they "elected" Cheyenne chief Brave Bear to be identified as the one who killed Custer. The reported payment was $1,000 and enough beef to feed all the Sioux bands at the Last Great Indian Council. Brave Bear never spoke of Little Big Horn.

Many claims were made by warriors who fought in that battle but none have born out the weight or the back-up as the story told by White Bull.

Any claims of who killed Custer are spurious.
In the years following the battle it became clear that no Native American on the field that day knew they were even fighting Custer. Custer had recently cut his long hair, and was not wearing his signature buckskins on the day of the battle.
In fact, Chief Gall only recognized Tom Custer, Custer's brother, who he had had previously met… but every credible source in the years immediately following the battle testified to having no idea Custer was there.

General Terry, who arrived on the scene in the days following the battle conducted a thorough investigation.
Custer was found stripped with only minor mutilation of his body (arms and legs still attached, whereas most other corpses had been dismembered )
He had NOT been scalped
And he had two wounds, A bullet wound in his chest, and another, 'contact' wound to his temple. ( described as powder blackened )

This strongly argues that there was no such hand to hand combat, as no warrior defeating Custer hand to hand would have left the body unscalped. Contrary to reportage, Natives American did not leave bodies unscalped as a sign of respect, they did not scalp men they did not personally defeat.

Terry found that Custer's column rode in good order to the river and started to cross, but that not one Shod horse made it to the other side.
He found that Custer's column then retreated in disorder, back up the embankment, ending up at the disordered and confusing site of the massacre.

Chief Gall reported that he was on his way from the northern part of the encampment toward the sound of fighting to the South ( Reno) when he was drawn to gunfire from the river near the middle of the camp… and he arrived to see Custer's cavalry in full retreat up the far bank…
SOMETHING had stopped Custer's charge across the river.

The Cheyenne, who were encamped near Custer's attempted crossing, tell the story of the Four Warriors… that when the women saw the Cavalry coming down Medicine Coulee and shouted an alarm, that only 4 Cheyenne braves were close enough to react, and that they countercharged Custer's column in the river.
They reported that with the first volley, ONE SOLDIER fell from his horse… that the column stopped, and rescued the fallen man from the river, and then milled about, and the whole column retreated.

Terry and subsequent forensics has found no evidence of a major exchange of fire at the crossing… no bodies, and no dead horses and very few bullet casings.
Custer had never in his career dismounted in the face of the enemy, nor had he ever stopped a charge over the loss of one man.

There is only one person that could have been lost that would have stopped the 7th from crossing the river, and that man is Custer himself.

The disordered melee that is seen in the disposition of the shells and bodies on the battlefield indicate a detachment that no longer had cogent leadership…. and certainly not the audacious leadership that Custer displayed thru his entire career.

The most likely explanation is that Custer was wounded in the initial volley at the crossing, and his men, unsure of what to do, rescued him, and retreated to re-group.
Custer may or may not have been conscious thru the remainder of the fight, but his fatal wound is similar to many such wounds found among the last to die and is consistent with a self inflicted "save the last bullet" scenario, or with a fellow trooper dispatching Custer to keep him from falling into the hands of the Natives alive.

That he was not scalped is the clincher… No native would take the scalp of a coward… and all native tribes considered suicide to be a cowards death.

Respectfully S.

1. custer had orders to await re-enforcements–no such order existed

2. custer refused to take repeating rifles along–no such equipment
was available to the army.

3. whiskey in the soldiers canteens–never heard this one before.

4. fathered a child by an indian woman–heard this one before but
it was a fact that custer could not have children.

I am a huge Custer history nut who taked ALL of Custer's career into account. If a person takes out their opinions based on hatred, you can only conclude that Custer was one of our finest military leaders who knew no fear and was instrumental in the Union winning the war between the states.

It is unfortunate that you describe yourself as "Indian" above all else. Nothing personal, but I am sick of people describing themselves as anything but Just American. That is why we are so divided.

As for Custer being a baby killer, which there is no REAL evidence to prove it, the Indians can hardly stand as warriors with stellar conduct.

You most likely do not know that Custer did not hate the Indians. As a matter of fact, he had commented that if he were an Indian, he would be fighting as well. You being in the military, you know that when you go to war, you follow orders. If the orders are unjust, it lies at the feet of the politicians and high commanders who send the troops to fight.

As for me, I do not hate anyone and try to see the past as those who lived it saw it. Being pragmatic about it, the Indians lost. It was not right, but we all know that life is not fair.

The way I see it, it was destiny that the white man won. If the Indians had won and kept the US, I suspect they would still be in teepees hunting buffalo.

The way I see it, the best thing we could do for the Indian today would be to take away his reservations and force him to assimalate into American culture. As it stands, you have nothing but a huge welfare state with alcoholism at 80%. I am sick of minority groups claiming the government OWES ME. Get over it and move on.

Then, in late February 1876, sitting-stubborn & 6,000 bucks invaded Crow territory itching for a fight. The waited until mid June & fought Crook. A week later they mutilated the bodies of over 230 men, at two fight sites, on Sunday June 25.

These sioux were as barbaric as aztecs or anasazi: committed acts of human sacrifice, mutilation and stone age forms of torture and murder.

I ACCUSE THE SIOUX OF STONE AGE BARBARISM:
1-to Indians & white Americans: mutilations, scalpings, cannibalism & human sacrifice.

2-Racism to white Americans that predates the French & Indian Wars and spying for the British;

3-un-American activities in the forests east of Mississippi against Americans & forest Indians; and on the Great Plains against white Americans, Crow, Arikara, Hidatsa, Mandan, Shoshone & Pawnee.

All those Indian tribes fought with Custer, Miles, Crook, against the sioux for their land and their sacred black hills.