August 12, 2013
Manning’s Defense to Open Sentencing Case
August 12, 2013
FORT MEADE, Md. — Army Pfc. Bradley Manning’s defense team is opening its case at the soldier’s sentencing hearing.
Defense attorney David Coombs says he expects to call the first of more than a dozen…
Sketches from the Trial of Bradley Manning
By Molly Crabapple
On Tuesday, I sat in a Fort Meade courtroom, waiting to hear if Bradley Manning would be found guilty of treason. Bradley Manning’s trial (like those of hacktivist Jeremy Hammond, or Anonymous-affiliated journalist Barrett Brown) is a trial of modernity. It shows the old world lashing out against an increasingly uncontrollable future.
I was there because I know which side I’m on … (Cont’d)
BRADLEY MANNING SUPPORT NETWORK UPDATE 8/10/13: Defense begins sentencing arguments on Monday August 12, 2013. Bradley Manning may take stand Wednesday, August 14, 2013.
The prosecution’s sentencing arguments have come to a close and the defense will begin Monday. Sentencing could occur as soon as Friday, August 16, and the Guardian reports that Bradley Manning may take the stand on Wednesday:
Manning’s defense team will begin presenting evidence on Monday in the court-martial at Fort Meade, near Baltimore. The defense attorney David Coombs said Manning will give a statement before the defense rests on Wednesday. (Cont’d)
“A nation that is afraid to let its people judge the truth and falsehood in an open market is a nation that is afraid of its people.” -John F. Kennedy
"It may be that by shutting down the service, he (LavaBit’s owner Ladar Levison) can’t comply, and so it’s doubtful he would be held in contempt,” Gidari said. But “shutting down the service could be viewed as obstruction of justice, so he isn’t necessarily out of the woods yet.”
The first volley of a Citizen’s War on the NSA’s unconstitutional spying has been fired.
In a move that blocks governmental monitoring of private email accounts, two secure email providers closed shop on Thursday rather than divulge information about their users to the authorities. The first Dallas-based Lavabit — which reportedly counts among its users NSA-leaker Edward Snowden — stopped operations after apparently fighting a losing battle to resist a federal surveillance order. (Snowden called the decision “inspiring" in a note to the Guardian’s Glenn Greenwald.) A few hours later, Silent Circle, headquartered outside Washington, D.C., announced it was suspending its encrypted email service as a preemptive measure before ever receiving a command from the government to spy on its users.
The companies’ extreme actions put them in an exclusive club. Security and legal experts said they could not recall a company preventing government access to its customers’ information by shutting down its business. Some companies have appealed surveillance orders in the courts or attempted to force more public disclosure about the secretive intelligence-gathering process, but they have remained functioning.
Refusing to comply with an order also means the government is cut off from potentially valuable information that it may have no other means of obtaining…
Spy or Die - By Shane Harris, Foreign Policy
BRADLEY MANNING, THE NUREMBERG CHARTER AND REFUSING TO COLLABORATE WITH WAR CRIMES Pt 3 Of 4
'JAY: But it's not just wrong, 'cause it's more than just wrong.
PRASHAD: It’s illegal.
PRASHAD: It’s illegal.
JAY: —‘cause when Manning sees the video of the helicopter gunning down essentially unarmed people and then shooting this van that comes up afterward to help these people, that’s a war crime. More than that, it’s a war crime within a war where the whole war itself is a war crime because it’s illegal. And he has a legal obligation to do what he can to go against that. And I wish that had been his defense, and it wasn’t, but I wish they’d used Nuremberg as his defense, because then it would have put the war on trial.’ (cont’d)
You should care and also care about what newspaper you read as well?
Submission from Moiz
US v. PFC. BRADLEY MANNING: Breakdown on the Imminent Verdict
Pfc. Bradley Manning is charged with 22 offenses under the Uniform Code of Military Justice. He pled to 10 lesser included offenses and currently faces up to 20 years. Manning will face life plus 154 years in a military prison if convicted on the prosecution’s case.
The presiding military judge, Col. Denise Lind, will announce her findings on Manning’s guilt or innocence at 1:00 p.m. EST on Tuesday, July 30 31. Below is a breakdown on how the judge could rule on the verdict.
Unlike a federal criminal trial, where sentencing occurs after the creation of a pre-sentencing report, if Manning is convicted of any of the charges, a sentencing case will commence immediately. During the sentencing case, both defense and the prosecution will present evidence, call witnesses, and make arguments about appropriate punishment.
The maximum sentences for the charged offenses are outlined in the Manual for Courts-Martial and Lind’s previous court rulings.
Since the court ruled that motive and actual damage (or ‘lack of damage’) evidence was not relevant at trial (except to prove circumstantially that Manning was cognizant of the fact that the enemy used the WikiLeaks website), evidence of Manning’s intent and the impact of the leaks will finally be heard by the court at sentencing.
It remains to be seen, however, how much of the sentencing phase of this trial will be open to the public, since the government is expected to elicit testimony from these 13 classified sentencing witnesses in closed sessions or in classified stipulations.
For more information on 13 closed sentencing witnesses go, here. For more information on the three classified damage assessments that will be used during sentencing, go here.
Military prosecutors charged Private First Class Bradley Manning on March 1, 2011 with violating three Articles of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (U.C.M.J):
Charge I: ‘Aiding the Enemy’ under Article 104
Charge II: 16 separate offenses under General Article 134
Charge III: 5 offenses of Article 92 ‘Failure to obey order or regulation’
The 16 separate offenses under Charge II General Article 134 include:
1 specification for ‘Wanton Publication of Intelligence on the Internet’
8 specification of the Espionage Act— 18 U.S.C. 793(e)
2 specification of the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act— 18 U.S.C. 1030(a)(1)
5 specification of ‘Stealing U.S. Government Property’— 18 U.S.C. 641
The five separate offenses of Charge III Article 92 or a ‘failure to obey order or regulation’ include:
attempting to bypass a network of information security system mechanism
adding unauthorized software to a Secret Internet Protocol Router Network on two separate occasions using an information system in a manner other than its intended purpose
wrongfully storing classified information
GUILTY OR INNOCENT
'AIDING THE ENEMY'
Manning could be found guilty or innocent of aiding the enemy.
If he is found guilty, he faces life in prison.
Manning could be found guilty or innocent of “Wanton Publication of Intelligence”.
If he is found guilty, he faces up to two years in prison.
Manning pled guilty to seven lesser included offenses of the Espionage Act for “unauthorized possession” and “willful communication” of:
an unclassified video of a 7 July 2007 Apache air strike known as Collateral Murder
2 classified CIA Red Cell Memos
more than 25 classified records from the Iraq War Logs
more than 25 classified records from the Afghan War Diary
more than three classified records from the GTMO Files
5 classified records pertaining to the Garani air strike in May 2009, and
a United States Army Counterintelligence Center 2008 Report on WikiLeaks
Manning pled not guilty to an eighth violation of the Espionage Act for an unclassified video of a May 2009 U.S. bombing in the Farah Province of Afghanistan, known as the Garani video.
Manning could be found guilty of the greater offense for the eight Espionage Act charges. If convicted on the greater offense, the maximum punishment of 10 years each.
Manning is not likely to be found innocent for the seven offenses that he pled to a lesser included offense for. NB Despite Manning’s plea, Lind must still “find” Manning guilty for each crime.
The maximum punishment for each lesser included offense for “unauthorized possession” and “willful communication” is 2 years. So, he is already exposed to 14 years for his LIO plea for seven
Espionage Act charges.
Manning pled not guilty to the eighth offense under the Espionage Act for the Garani video. So,
Manning still could be found innocent, guilty of the greater offense, or guilty of the lesser included offense for the “unauthorized possession” and “willful communication” of the Garani video. See more on the Garani airstrike, here.
Manning could also be found guilty of “attempt”, which is a lesser included offense of each of the eight Espionage Act charges.
'COMPUTER FRUAD AND ABUSE ACT'
Manning also pled guilty to the lesser included offense of two charges under the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act for ‘knowingly accessing’ and ‘willfully communicating’ 117 U.S. Department of State Cables. He is exposed to four years on his LIO plea.
Military prosecutors accepted Manning’s plea to the lesser included offense for “knowingly accessing” and “willfully communicating” a State Department cable known as Reykjavik 13.
Military prosecutors moved forward on the greater offense, despite Manning’s plea, for “exceeding authorized access” for 116 diplomatic cables. Manning could be found guilty of the greater offense or guilty on his plea to the lesser included offense.
He will not likely be found innocent for the two charges under the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, because of his plea to LIO.
If convicted of the greater offense for the 117 diplomatic cables, he faces up to 10 years in prison. If found guilty of his plea to the lesser included offense, he could face up to two years in prison. He can also be found guilty of the lesser included offense of attempt for the 117 diplomatic cables.
STEALING USG PROPERTY
Manning pled not guilty to “stealing, purloining, or knowingly converting” five government databases containing records for the Iraq War Logs, the Afghan War Diary, the GTMO Files, Cablegate, and the Global Email Address List from the U.S. Forces- Iraq SharePoint Exchange Server.
Manning could be found innocent or guilty of each of the five offense as charged. He would face up to ten years if convicted on the greater offense for each databases (Iraq War Logs, the Afghan War Diary, the GTMO Files, NetCentric Diplomacy, and the Global email Address List).
Manning could also be found guilty on a lesser included offense for attempt or if military prosecutors fail to establish the value of each of the five databases at more than $1000.
NB If convicted of the lesser included offense for “stealing, purloining, or knowingly converting” the Department of State NetCentric Diplomacy database, Manning faces five years maximum punishment, because it is a non-military database.
'AMENDED CHARGE SHEET'
In a recent controversial legal maneuver, Lind ruled military prosecutors could change the charge sheet after both defense and the prosecution had rested their cases— nineteen months into the proceedings, on July 24.
Military prosecutors conceded after the close of evidence at trial that Manning did not steal the entire database for three charge offenses of stealing the CIDNE-Iraq (Iraq War Logs) and the CIDNE-Afghanistan (Afghan War Diary) databases and the US Forces-Iraq Microsoft Outlook Global Address List. The Court ruled the databases were equivalent to the records contained within them. Defense has moved the Court to reconsider its ruling. The judge is expected to rule on the defense motion for reconsideration prior to announcing her verdict.
'FAILURE TO OBEY A LAWFUL GENERAL REGULATION'
Manning pled guilty to one of five offenses charged under Article 92 for a failure to obey a lawful general regulation” for wrongfully storing classified information. He is not likely to be found innocent on his plea to that offense, and faces up to two years.
Manning could also be found innocent or guilty of four other offenses under Article 92, and could be convicted of up to two years for each offense he is found guilty of.
Source: http://www.alexaobrien.com/secondsight/wikileaks/bradley_manning/us_v_pfc_manning_break_down_on_the_imminent_verditc.html via @carwinb on twitter
I AM BRADLEY MANNING
It’s time to stop the war on whistle-blowers.
iam.bradleymanning.org | #iambradleymanning
LT Dan Choi
Bishop George Packard
This work was produced by independent volunteers in collaboration with the Bradley Manning Support Network.
Music via creative commons attribution license:
“Wars Damage the Civilian Society as Much as They Damage the Enemy. Soldiers Never Get Over It.”
― Paul Fussell
After Manning’s Defense Closing Arguments at Fort Meade, there will be a large rally in Fort McNair DC! Pardon him! Act For Bradley! Free Bradley Manning!
BRADLEY MANNING TRIAL JUDGE INCREASED PRESS SECURITY “BECAUSE OF REPEAT VIOLATIONS OF THE RULES OF COURT”
Huffington Post reporter Matt Sledge read my Boing Boing post earlier today about reports from the Bradley Manning trial of dramatically-increased security measures for press. Those measures including armed military p olice standing behind journalists at their laptops, snooping on their screens.
He reports that the new, oppressive security measures were ordered directly by the judge because reporters were violating court rules (which no one can find a copy of), and carrying “prohibited electronics.” For this, the government needs armed military police standing right behind reporters as they type, in the media room.
Continued at http://boingboing.net/2013/07/25/bradley-manning-trial-judge-in.html
Art by Clark Stoeckley (twitter: @wikileakstruck). Col. Denise Lind, the Judge in the Bradley Manning military trial.