13 ms·

Yes! 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 hea

• llamataboot 13y ago
  Still probably multiple decades in prison, but not guilty on the most egregious charge is certainly a tiny breath of fresh air
  • pvnick 13y ago
    I 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 ago
      Given that it was a military trial under the UCMJ, no it wouldn't have.
      • pvnick 13y ago
        I 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 ago
          This 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 ago
            Hey, 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 ago
    Unfortunately, looks like he will serve multiple decades: guilty of five espionage charges, guilty of five theft charges.
• adamnemecek 13y ago
  Is guilty of espionage that much better though?
  • deleted 13y ago
    [deleted]
  • mcantelon 13y ago
    Exactly. I'd say folks should wait to see what they sentence him with before declaring the outcome balanced.
• mpyne 13y ago
  That'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.