Court Martial Proceedings Agains Air Force Lieutenant Kelly Flinn

For what it’s worth, the martial charges were about lying and violating orders they weren’t about adultery or “sexual assault”

Flinn's case, due in part to her high visibility in Air Force recruitment advertisements, drew national attention, eventually creating a media circus. The Chief of Staff of the Air Force, General Ronald Fogleman, testified at a congressional hearing that, "In the end, this is not an issue of adultery. This is an issue about an officer, entrusted to fly nuclear weapons, who lied."^[10]^ The media, however, largely treated the case as though Flinn were being tried by the military for the crime of adultery, and castigated the Air Force for allegedly firing her on moral grounds; a New York Times editorial on the case emphasized the adultery, rather than the actual military charges with which she was charged, and blamed the military's "antiquated adultery rules and their consistency in administering them, as well as their management training."

Completely different from the discussion about rampant sexual assault in the armed forces