11 ms·
Chelsea Manning released from jail with expiration of grand jury
- metildaa 7y agoAbout time this farce of a subpeona was ended. Chelsea already testified once on the matter the subpeona was about iirc. Edit: subpeona was not quashed, grand jury's term expired.
- ceejayoz 7y agoIt's not quashed. > "Today marked the expiration of the term of the grand jury, and so, after 62 days of confinement, Chelsea was released from the Alexandria Detention Center earlier today," her lawyers said in a statement. > "Unfortunately, even prior to her release, Chelsea was served with another subpoena," the statement adds. "It is therefore conceivable that she will once again be held in contempt of court, and be returned [to custody].
- metildaa 7y agoThis grand jury is certainly on a fishing expedition.
- tptacek 7y agoIt's not up to grand jury witnesses to decide that.
- stale2002 7y agoApparently it is. Because she is refusing to testify, and it is producing significant public backlash, and she was released eventually anyway. Seems like it worked out fine for Chelsea.
- metildaa 7y agoThe subpoena Chelsea was served with before release indicates that she will be right back in the same position in short order.
- tptacek 7y agoThe grand jury expired and was not extended. "Public backlash" had little to do with it.
- colechristensen 7y agoThe release was always going to happen eventually. Contempt is not a life sentence, in the US it isn't punishment but coercion. When the opportunity to testify is over, they let you out because they have nothing they want you to do any more. Doesn't stop them from serving you with another subpoena though.
- einpoklum 7y agoIt is for all men and women of good conscience to decide that. The jurors should refuse to cooperate and leak statements to that effect to the press. The prosecutor should resign. The prison guards should leave the doors open for her. etc.
- daveFNbuck 7y ago> Chelsea already testified once on the matter the subpeona was about iirc. The article said that too. Is she saying she spent 62 days in jail because she'd rather not repeat herself? That seems extremely odd if true.
- polynomial 7y agoThat's a pretty hardcore stance against self-reiterization.
- gatherhunterer 7y agoThe above article ignores the reason for her release: the expiration of the grand jury investigating Assange. Washington Post article here: https://wapo.st/2E11CUW https://wapo.st/2E11CUW
- ceejayoz 7y ago> The above article ignores the reason for her release: the expiration of the grand jury investigating Assange. No, it doesn't.
- eridius 7y ago> Her release on Thursday comes after the period during which she could be held for failing to give evidence expired. > "Today marked the expiration of the term of the grand jury, and so, after 62 days of confinement, Chelsea was released from the Alexandria Detention Center earlier today," her lawyers said in a statement.
- gatherhunterer 7y ago“The grand jury” is not descriptive of what the grand jury was investigating and declines to point out that her grand jury ended years ago.
- ceejayoz 7y agoThis was not "her" grand jury.
- Pfhreak 7y agoWe don't do that here. Cut it out with those asinine scare quotes.
- ceejayoz 7y agoMy comment has absolutely nothing to do with her gender. It's that the grand jury in question wasn't dealing with her case at all. The grand jury was tasked with Julian Assange, who isn't female, but more importantly isn't Chelsea Manning.
- montecarl 7y ago"her lawyers reportedly asked that she be confined at home due to medical issues, but the judge said US Marshals would address her care needs." That is a terrifying sentence to read after having learned about the medical care provided (or not provided...) in US prisons. It almost reads to me as if they planned on killing her.
- fwip 7y agoIf you want even more evidence, look up her medical treatment before her sentence was commuted. They nearly succeeded at killing her that time.
- rcw4256 7y agoThey've already failed to provide necessary post-surgery care, resulting in potentially permanent, intractable medical complications, according to this declaration filed three days ago while she was still imprisoned: https://www.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.vaed.405498/gov.uscourts.vaed.405498.29.1.pdf https://www.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.vaed.405498... (paragraph 13)
- bonniemuffin 7y agoThe state of medical care in US prisons is really horrifying. Like this one from four days ago, in which a mentally ill woman gave birth alone in her cell. https://www.cnn.com/2019/05/06/us/woman-gives-birth-jail-cell-broward-florida/index.html https://www.cnn.com/2019/05/06/us/woman-gives-birth-jail-cel...
- deleted 7y ago[deleted]
- Shivetya 7y agothere isn't much US government managed health care that is worth a damn, just ask veterans or Indians on reservations. when people outside the country keep lamenting the US doesn't have government provided healthcare they need to realize the examples we have are both horrible and many doubt that they have the capacity to not inflict the same shoddy care on the current system. Most jails and prison care is the same because it is all government managed. while the private jails, which are a very small minority, have problems they are held to higher standard that government does not apply to itself. the prison/jail system is just a money machine for the sheriff and police unions of the country and therefor actively supported by the politicians they support/control. California had to be compelled by the Federal Courts just to reduce overcrowding and provide better health care
- burtonator 7y agoI didn't realize this about US law but if you've already been convicted of a crime OR they give you immunity you can be forced to testify. They did this in Aaron Swartz's case and gave people immunity to force them to testify. I was friends with Aaron and felt that he was mostly a hero in this situation though he was probably guilty of misdemeanor trespass. It was troubling to see how upset it made my friends that they were going to be forced to testify against someone they loved or were friends with.
- tptacek 7y agoOf course you can be forced to testify. That goes all the way back to English common law. The public has a claim to every man's evidence. A strict privilege against self-testimony is somewhat distinctive to our US system. Even countries that share it with us, like the UK, limit it; for instance, in the UK, your refusal to testify against yourself can be held against you.
- saagarjha 7y agoIn what way? Can they automatically assume the worst possible thing you could have said?
- dogma1138 7y agoNo, it’s called adverse inference basically the prosecution can say that because you didn’t cooperate you are guilty. That said you cannot convict anyone on adverse inference alone.
- yeahforsureman 7y agoPrivilege against self-incrimination is a generally recognised international standard and, for example, lies at the heart of the notion of a fair procedure under Article 6 of the European Convention of Human Rights.
- mehrdadn 7y ago
- fwip 7y agoUnfortunately, she's got another subpoena next week for a separate case with the same set of questions. It seems like her freedom will be short-lived.
- gatherhunterer 7y agoThe current administration has already pardoned one American convicted of a war crime and is considering a second pardon for a war criminal Navy SEAL who was repeatedly reported by fellow soldiers, in one case for murdering a young girl in front of other children without provocation. At least the policy is consitent: if you murder civilians we have your back and whistle blowers will be jailed at all costs. Even former soldiers are appalled: https://wapo.st/2DZl4BJ https://wapo.st/2DZl4BJ.
- quantumwoke 7y agoThe 'nanny state' quickly progresses to the 'police state' when things like international extradition, FBI investigations, grand juries get involved. Concerning. :(
- colechristensen 7y agoWhat do you have to do to deserve extradition and conviction then beyond what Assange has done?
- deleted 7y ago[deleted]
- whamlastxmas 7y agoIt's more that the US is plainly and obviously intending to charge assange with tremendously more the second he gets to US soil. Including charges that carry the death penalty. For actions that virtually every journalist would do
- colechristensen 7y agoJournalists are generally extremely careful when publishing classified material working with the government to understand and minimize the harm caused by publication. They are also careful to not direct others to commit crimes.
- kazagistar 7y agoCarelessness in journalism leads to death penalties, yet the revealed "carelessness" in war which harmed so many more leads to medals and coverups.
- caconym_ 7y agoHow strange it seems, now, the idea of a president somewhat worthy of the office.
- intuitionist 7y agoyes, given that the previous president put her in prison for seven years for exposing US war crimes under the president before him, crimes which that president continued to emulate, it’s been quite a few decades since we’ve had one of those.
- caconym_ 7y agoI feel that you're being quite reductive here, but I suppose this may very well be the sum total of your beliefs on the subject. I will take the comment at face value. Anyway, you'll notice that I used the word "somewhat" to qualify "worthy of the office"; I didn't just toss that word in because it sounded cool in my head. Relevant, from Wikipedia: > On January 26, 2017, in her first column for The Guardian since the commutation, Manning lamented that President Obama's political opponents consistently refused to compromise, resulting in "very few permanent accomplishments" during his time in office. As The Guardian summarized it, she saw Obama's legacy as "a warning against not being bold enough." In response, President Donald Trump tweeted that Manning was an "ungrateful traitor" and should "never have been released."
- intuitionist 7y agoBombing wedding parties and starving Yemeni children and making bad tweets is worse than just bombing wedding parties and starving Yemeni children, to be sure, but focusing on the bad tweets misses the point spectacularly.
- caconym_ 7y ago"The point" being that Trump is no worse for our country, society, and the world at large than any other president before him whose decisions had (at least partially) bad outcomes? I think you're either unconsciously projecting your own narrowly black-and-white worldview onto my comments here, or being deliberately obtuse. Either way I'm done with this conversation unless your next comment is more interesting.
- tbarbugli 7y agoWhat's her reason to not testify?
- whamlastxmas 7y agoShe has nothing she can add that wasn't covered in her court martial, and trying to get her to testify now is basically harassment and bullying
- _rpd 7y agoShe doesn't want to testify in a non-public forum because it could cause her activist collaborators to become suspicious of her.
- segmondy 7y agoSo long as you didn't recently talk about it and don't ever plan on talking about it. You can go in and claim not to remember.
- blakespot 7y agoI’ll bet she gets picked up again in just days.
- hnbroseph 7y agorather than refusing to testify, couldn't you just answer with "i don't recall" to every question (or variations as appropriate)?
- whamlastxmas 7y agoIf they have evidence that a person in your position should reasonably know the answer, then you're in a bad situation. "I don't recall" doesn't fly very well unless you're HRC being interviewed by the FBI
- ghjjjj 7y agoDestruction of evidence is also a crime for all of us except HRC. No wonder the big orange Twinkie won!
- deleted 7y ago[deleted]
- ThrustVectoring 7y agoIn the general case, maybe. The objection here is specifically over providing non-public testimony. Even if your secret testimony didn't cover anything new or wasn't useful, how do other people know that?
- frittig 7y agoI wonder if Manning can pull the ol' Assange and hide in an embassy. It looks like the government is willing to make an example and send Manning to jail for an insanely long time, if not life. I personally would rather live my life in an embassy than in prison (not that this is a choice that I would like to have in the first place)
- ceejayoz 7y agoAssange largely discovered "hide in an embassy" is the same as prison, if not worse. Medical care is a huge issue.
- basetop 7y agoIt's insane the level of vindicativeness that government can reach. Worse than any bully and more fanatical than any terrorist. Of course the government is like this to mere peasants. If you are the wealthy elite, the government acts like a grovel servant rather than master. Expose war crimes - then you are public enemy #1. Be part of the wealthy elite who destroys the financial system and ruins the lives of millions - it's just good ol' boys being good ol' boys. And yet, everyday, we give more and more power to governments and corporations.
- dsfyu404ed 7y ago> If you are the wealthy elite, the government acts like a grovel servant rather than master. Anyone who draws the ire of government and doesn't have people on the inside (in the right places) protecting them WILL get screwed. The rich just have enough money to drag out the process and make that more difficult so you don't see them getting screwed over little things.
- pvaldes 7y agoShouldn't have the acts of Manning granted a little sympathy also among many people inside at this moment? I bet that not everybody is pro-war. Rich people would have much more offshore properties, business, friends or economic relationships with other countries. They would have much more to lose by wars or unstability than common people [Unless directly feeded by war promoting systems].
- JetSpiegel 7y ago> Shouldn't have the acts of Manning granted a little sympathy also among many people inside at this moment? I bet that not everybody is pro-war. Yes, but not the right people it seems.
- vlan0 7y ago>And yet, everyday, we give more and more power to governments... I think we should be careful about blaming government itself. But instead focus on the _people_ that make up the government. It seems there is a serious lack of equal representation throughout our government. For the most part, it has become a matter of who has the larger bank roll. It would be interesting to see a government with forced equal representation across the entire socioeconomic spectrum.
- tibbydudeza 7y agoIt would probably have been better to join Snowden in Moscow ... the land of the "free" is applicable if you go up against the military-industrial complex and their agenda.
- xparco 7y agoPeople are so gullible to believe this psyop it cracks me up lol