...in my overstated opinion. It is hard to get past the carefully planted bias, but well worth the effort.

Regardless of the extended discussions on the subject, the fact remains the statute was on the books and the Coroner followed through, if for no other reason than to protect his posterior. It did demonstrate that not all was in favour of the Earps and their under-handed methods and one has to be somewhat prejudiced to not see that attitude factored in.

Ike had a good case... for manslaughter! Unfortunately, he had poor support in businessmen who had little time or knowledge of what they were taking on; and maybe didn't really care as they seemed to put little effort into the whole fiasco.

What startles me most is the skip-overs of Ike's testimony because of force-fed bias. Ike presented himself very well in court, made honest statements and even openly admitted mistakes made. as any cowboy of the time would. He was patient with the asinine questions put to him. If he was the way often described, he would have lost it on the stand and punched out the jerk who kept trying to ridicule him.

What many miss is that Ike was neither a jerk, habitual drunk, a troublemaker, or a coward. Such a man would never be tolerated by others on the frontier as they endangered all. In reality, Ike was liked and respected among his peers. The answer to that is usually, what were his peers like? Well, what does the record show? It is not hard to find!

I wish I could have been there to back up the old boy, but I was born too late and lacked the knowledge to take over; but could anyone do any worse in a Kangaroo court set-up?