26 ms·
Manning not guilty of aiding the enemy, but convicted of multiple other counts
- pvnick 13y agoYes! I'm at work but started cheering in my chair when I read the verdict of Not Guilty on aiding the enemy. Was truly expecting the worse with that, but to hear a "not guilty" charge on this was very reassuring.
- llamataboot 13y agoStill probably multiple decades in prison, but not guilty on the most egregious charge is certainly a tiny breath of fresh air
- pvnick 13y agoI agree. The problem with that charge in particular, however, is that it would have had extremely far-reaching implications for all investigative journalism
- rayiner 13y agoGiven that it was a military trial under the UCMJ, no it wouldn't have.
- pvnick 13y agoI realize you're very knowledgable in legal matters and enjoy playing the nitpicking contrarian in these cases, shining the light of truth on all us hopeless ignoramuses, but regardless of under whose jurisdiction the trial actually took place, yes, the US government equating leaks with the definition of treason would absolutely set a precedent that would spill over both into civilian courts as well as into the minds of potential leakers and journalists.
- rayiner 13y agoThis isn't a nitpick, it cuts down the premise of your whole argument. Military tribunals decide lots of different things--when was the last time you heard a court or a regular person contemplate what would've been the result under military law? This isn't a question of legal experience--I'm asking based on your experience as a civilian person out in the world. Our culture draws an extremely deep distinction between military and civilian law.
- pvnick 13y agoHey, I wanted to apologize for my personal attack earlier. I've been having a bad day and took some of that frustration out on you. But as for your question, I'm speaking less about legal precedent (of course there's a difference between military and civilian court) and more about perception to would-be whistleblowers and government officials that this is what happens now to people that leak secrets, especially for such a publicized case.
- gedrap 13y agoUnfortunately, looks like he will serve multiple decades: guilty of five espionage charges, guilty of five theft charges.
- adamnemecek 13y agoIs guilty of espionage that much better though?
- deleted 13y ago[deleted]
- mcantelon 13y agoExactly. I'd say folks should wait to see what they sentence him with before declaring the outcome balanced.
- mpyne 13y agoThat's was probably the right verdict, keeping in mind that the judge deliberately made that charge more restrictive than is given in the UCMJ. So I'd be careful about drawing too much precedent from that, because for this particular case the judge asked the prosecution to prove that Manning not only aided the enemy in the UCMJ sense, but that he did so with 'evil intent'. The prosecution didn't prove that (and indeed had a pretty embarrassing closing argument IMO). But the next soldier who leaks military intelligence may not get the benefit of extra elements added to their charge list by the judge.
- breckinloggins 13y agoThis is a pretty balanced verdict, in my opinion. It upholds the law without further perpetuating the reputation of the US government as a body that will cry "enemy combatant!" and "terrorism!" at every political opportunity. Not that that still doesn't happen, of course.
- mtgx 13y agoBut doesn't the Espionage charge achieve kind of the same thing? Was he really spying for anyone? He wasn't. So I still don't see this as a fair verdict.
- Jtsummers 13y agoEspionage is not just spying for someone, it's the act of obtaining the information illicitly, which he did.
- ceejayoz 13y agoHe took classified data outside his purview and provided it to folks without access, which seems like pretty clear espionage. You don't have to be working for a particular foreign government to be performing espionage.
- guelo 13y agoHe was spying on the American government for the American people.
- phaus 13y agoIt's pretty much impossible for any judge or jury to find him not guilty of all charges when he leaked over 700000 documents that had absolutely nothing to do with anything illegal that the government was doing. If he had only stolen and leaked incriminating information, his case would have been much stronger.
- foobarqux 13y ago> If he had only stolen and leaked incriminating information, his case would have been much stronger. I don't think that's true under USC and even less likely to be true under UCMJ
- guelo 13y agoManning is probably facing life in prison on the espionage charges. The acquittal on aiding the enemy is interesting, but practically not that important.
- unethical_ban 13y agoIt has/would have had an impact on what is considered "giving information to the enemy". If they found him guilty of that, then any document release posted to the public for the intent of the public consumption would be considered "aiding the enemy".
- SwellJoe 13y agoIt is important for future whistleblowers. It is possibly not important for Manning's sentence...though, the willingness of future presidents (maybe we'll get an honest one eventually) to pardon Manning would be greatly diminished had he been convicted of aiding the enemy. It's also the only sane result. Even people within the various branches have said they knew of no harm that had come from the released information.
- deleted 13y ago[deleted]
- joering2 13y agointeresting read i submitted an hour ago: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6127558 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6127558 Edit: IMHO interesting.
- untog 13y agoThat's not an interesting read, it is an out of date article from CNN.
- nawitus 13y agoMilitary judge? Military lawyer? Military jail? Seems pretty.. well.. fascist (in the original meaning of the word).
- rayiner 13y agoMilitary defendant.
- ojbyrne 13y agoI'd be inclined to agree with you if he wasn't in the military.
- gresrun 13y agoNot fascist. As an enlisted man in the US military, Manning is subject to the jurisdiction of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ). [1] [1] http://www.au.af.mil/au/awc/awcgate/ucmj.htm http://www.au.af.mil/au/awc/awcgate/ucmj.htm
- comrade_ogilvy 13y agoAs a volunteer member of the armed services, he is expected to be held accountable by standards that do not necessarily apply to civilians. That can cut both ways. In this case, it is likely to the defendants disadvantage, but that was always part of the context of his possible actions before they happened.
- jgalt212 13y agoI commend Manning for sticking around to face the music and not going AWOL. As such, in my eyes, he's way more of a genuine activist than Snowden. There can be no Letter from Birmingham Jail without the jail.
- mpyne 13y agoEr, Manning would likely not have been caught without Lamo ratting him out. Manning 'sticking around' has been entirely outside of his control since that happened.
- 67726e 13y agoWhy should someone have to lose their freedom for exposing another's wrongdoing? We should incentivize whistleblowers, not make them risk rotting in a jail cell for the rest of their lives.
- sophacles 13y agoThis is a false dilemma and disingenuous stance. You are basically saying that "unless you are willing to suffer, the problem you're talking about can't really be a problem". (Actually you're saying that you can't be an activist without suffering, and the implication is that if it's not worth activism, it's not a big deal. So basically what I said).
- jgalt212 13y agoI guess that's exactly what I'm saying: You cannot be a true activist without taking heat from the powers that be and not running from them. So I guess we must agree to disagree. That being said, I think if you look at activists that have been studied and/or revered throughout history most have paid a steep price (many with their lives) for causes they support.
- mcantelon 13y agoThe idea that Snowden, by giving up his entire life and making himself a refugee, isn't "taking heat" is an illogical talking point designed to smear him. You try fleeing your country permanently, leaving behind friends and family, and living stateless for weeks with the world's foremost superpower trying to bargain for you and tell me you're not "taking heat".
- ck2 13y agoWe should be linking to the video he sacrificed his life for, where they are mowing down civilians and journalists in the streets. We're busy shopping at the mall, he's going to be rotting in a freezing tiny cell for 50+ years for exposing the crimes of our government.
- short_circut 13y agoSo I read (on wikipedia so not the best source) the key tenants of the espionage act which he was found guilty under. I find it to be written generally enough to be ambiguous in a similar vein to recent laws such as the NDAA not really defining hostilites and enemies. I wonder what are the limitations on it? Was the constitutional definition of treason not enough. Again I feel like overly broad language in a law used to convict people that politicians deem need to be convicted. edit: I think this further proves my point/adds to its ambiguousness http://rt.com/usa/court-ruling-whistleblowers-prosecution-768/ http://rt.com/usa/court-ruling-whistleblowers-prosecution-76...
- deleted 13y ago[deleted]
- nikcub 13y agoI was prepared to be outraged at the verdict after the defense appeal to vacate the 'aiding enemy' charge was thrown out by the judge the other day[0], but being found not guilty is very important in terms of both his sentence and precedent for future military whistleblowers. It also vindicates the defense decision to stick with a military hearing rather than a ~~civil~~ jury[1], which almost certainly could have been stacked to find a guilty verdict on the aiding the enemy charge (especially in Virginia - the preferred jurisdiction for fed government prosecution because of the slanted jury pool of ex-military and ex-gov types). This is probably the best Manning could have hoped for, the evidence was stacked heavily against him on the other charges and he had already pleaded guilty to most. [0] http://www.thenation.com/blog/175355/judge-refuses-throw-out-key-aiding-enemy-charge-against-pfc-bradley-manning http://www.thenation.com/blog/175355/judge-refuses-throw-out... [1] Thanks mpayne, you're right - military jury
- mpyne 13y agoManning was never under threat of being judged by a civilian jury. It would have been a military jury, who even if pulled from Ft. Meade would have come from all walks of life before joining the military. Likewise I don't think this means what you think it means for future whistleblowers. He could still very well be sentenced effectively to confinement for life, after all, and the thing that saved his bacon regarding 'aiding the enemy' is that the judge added another element to the charge, which the prosecution then failed to prove. With that said, I don't think it could have gone better for Manning under a jury trial, so it certainly looks prudent from his end.
- sage_joch 13y agoI don't feel outrage these days so much as foreboding. I was convinced the verdict was a foregone conclusion. It's hard to describe how damn good it feels to be wrong on this. When I saw the verdict on cnn.com, I immediately interrupted my coworkers to tell them the news.
- ferdo 13y agoManning is far more heroic than any other serving member of the Military-Industrial-Surveillance Complex. Shoot, this "war" isn't even declared so I'm unsure how he could even be accused of aiding an undeclared enemy.
- lolwutf 13y agoWhoa, whoa, whoa, hombre. To broadly estimate the heroism of every other serving member in any singular statement is foolhardy, at best. There are lots of good people doing good, heroic, insanely patriotic, admirable, and honorable things in that Military-Industrial-Surveillance Complex you describe. Don't let the mistakes and abuses of the top give you some feeling that the system and everyone in it is corrupt. That system is literally putting themselves in front of bullets right now to defend your right to have such misguided ideas. What are you doing today?
- toomuchtodo 13y agoDon't let the mistakes and abuses of the top give you some feeling that the system and everyone in it is corrupt. That system is literally putting themselves in front of bullets right now to defend your right to have such misguided ideas. What are you doing today? Careful there chief. I'm not sitting in a swank control room in Vegas killing innocent men and women via drone strikes in Pakistan and Afghanistan. No one is putting themselves in front of bullets for my rights. They're putting themselves in front of bullets for their own reasons, but not for me.
- bwaldrep 13y agoAgain with the sweeping characterizations. Why do you assume that every single person in the armed forces is corrupt? As someone with a brother and several close friends in the military, this attitude is disheartening. You are free to believe that the leadership or even large swaths of the military is corrupt, but you cannot honestly state that no one is putting themselves in front of bullets for your rights. I have personally met several who repeatedly face bullets and IEDs because of their belief that they are protecting the rights and safety of civilians back home. You may believe their actions are naive or misguided, but that doesn't mean that they are all mindless drones motivated by purely selfish reasons.
- falk 13y agoHe faces up to 130 years in prison. Wow.
- rooshdi 13y agoYep. Justice at its finest.
- adestefan 13y agoAnd once again someone takes a bunch of numbers and blindly adds them up. Same thing happened when that guy in San Diego was looking at 100+ years for spray painting the Bank of America. It's really up to the judge to sentence him. In the end he'll probably get 10-20 years.
- guelo 13y agoHere is a useful chart explaining the charges and verdict, http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/special/national/manning-verdict http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/special/national/mannin...
- mempko 13y agoHis leak stopped the Iraq war.
- rz2k 13y agoDo a lot of people actually believe that it contributed to it in any significant way?
- mpyne 13y agoApparently there's one more than I thought before. On the other hand Manning's leak has lead to the Arab Spring, if other reports are to be believed. As Egypt continues its horrible unrest and thousands continue to die in Syria (with absolutely no certainty they'll ever overthrow Assad) I wonder if we will decide it was all worth it in the end?
- jessaustin 13y agoCareful. That same argument undermines the sole remaining justification for the entire USA campaign in Iraq, that we were somehow "improving" their society.
- mpyne 13y agoI know. I've said as much (in reverse) to people pointing out that the USA shouldn't have been in Iraq but still somehow claiming that what Manning did is worth it if it leads to democracy in Arab countries. But the USA never should have gone into Iraq based on what the leaders knew at the time. Why do you assume I think otherwise?
- jessaustin 13y agoI assume nothing!!1!
- falk 13y agoI thought this was an interesting tidbit from the Center for Constitutional Rights. "While the "aiding the enemy" charges (on which Manning was rightly acquitted) received the most attention from the mainstream media, the Espionage Act itself is a discredited relic of the WWI era, created as a tool to suppress political dissent and antiwar activism, and it is outrageous that the government chose to invoke it in the first place against Manning. Government employees who blow the whistle on war crimes, other abuses and government incompetence should be protected under the First Amendment. We now live in a country where someone who exposes war crimes can be sentenced to life even if not found guilty of aiding the enemy, while those responsible for the war crimes remain free. If the government equates being a whistleblower with espionage or aiding the enemy, what is the future of journalism in this country? What is the future of the First Amendment? Manning’s treatment, prosecution, and sentencing have one purpose: to silence potential whistleblowers and the media as well. One of the main targets has been our clients, WikiLeaks and Julian Assange, for publishing the leaks. Given the U.S. government’s treatment of Manning, Assange should be granted asylum in his home country of Australia and given the protections all journalists and publishers deserve. We stand in solidarity with Bradley Manning and call for the government to take heed and end its assault on the First Amendment." http://ccrjustice.org/newsroom/press-releases/ccr-condemns-manning-verdict%2C-questions-future-of-first-amendment http://ccrjustice.org/newsroom/press-releases/ccr-condemns-m...
- bwaldrep 13y agoBy volunteering to join the military and obtain security clearance, Manning waived his First Amendment right to disclose anything he saw fit. If he only broke the law to reveal evidence of government wrongdoing, then there might be a case that he was just a whistleblower. However, leaking hundreds of thousands of additional classified documents that demonstrate no government wrongdoing is indefensible. While some may believe that the incriminating leaks were excusable, the rest of his behavior should not be forgotten. Honing in on one aspect of Manning's actions does not justify making him a martyr or painting this trial as purely an assault on the First Amendment.
- saraid216 13y ago
- guelo 13y agoToo bad Manning wasn't illegally torturing people, Obama would have let him destroy any evidence and blocked any investigation.
- dil8 13y agoIts a sad day for truth... and a sad day from democracy
- jayferd 13y agoYeah but they all boil down to the central charge of "embarrassing the government".