Something else to consider: in all of the mass of Flipper material (and there is a bunch)-either written by Flipper or by Flipper and legal counsel--there is not a single word given as testimony/evidence under oath in open court. All of these words are what lawyers call ex parte-or from a one-sided or partisan point of view. For example, during his lengthy court-martial Flipper exercised his legal right to remain silent. But near the close of the trial he does read and then submits to the court a lengthy statement in which he descibes the events leading to his arrest and trial. This statement, however, is just that--a statement. It was not submitted under oath; therefore was not coinsided as evidence;and the trial judge advocate (prosecutor) could not question Flipper on his words.

I am not suggesting here that Flipper spoke/wrote anything but the truth as he saw it. But researchers/historians and others interested in the Flipper story need to fully understand the circumstances and conditions surrounding the Lieutenant's writings/statements.