What a dilemma! What do you do when a book is well-written and well-researched, but you also happen to be aware that the author is uncomfortably steeped in controversies over his own misrepresentation of himself, his occasionally violent behavior toward women and elders, and his crass dismissal of victims of violence through which he justifies the use of violent assault on those regarded as political enemies? (he teased that the 9-11 victims were deserving targets).
Well, I guess you try to be honest. You say "This guy writes well!" and "His research is reliable and worth collecting."
But then you caution readers that Churchill himself is unsettling to MANY traditional Native people who do not regard him as an authentic representation of an Indian voice or ethic, and you urge readers to research Churchill online in order to distinguish between a skilled collection of scholarship and an individual author whom some may find to be blasphemous to Native traditionalism.