WikiLeaks Suspect Wins Battle Over US Documents
Source: AFP
WikiLeaks suspect wins battle over US documents
(AFP) – 1 hour ago
FORT MEADE, Maryland — A US military judge ordered prosecutors Monday to share more documents with WikiLeaks suspect Bradley Manning after defense lawyers accused them of hiding information that could help their client's case.
For months, Manning's defense team has demanded access to reports by government agencies, including the CIA, that assessed the effect of the leak of classified documents to the WikiLeaks website.
Manning is accused of passing on a massive trove of files to WikiLeaks but his lawyers believe the reports will show the alleged disclosures had no major effect on the country's national security.
Judge Denise Lind ruled that government prosecutors must provide "damage assessment" reports from the CIA, the State Department, the FBI, the Office of the National Counterintelligence Executive (Oncix) and other documents that were relevant for the defense.
Read more: http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5gat_yPBw1ftIBd0TQIsGoEuPJ5Tg?docId=CNG.e2dddb0ced039a6ca22b2d8bbfecc90d.991
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
clang1
(884 posts)'Judge Denise Lind ruled that government prosecutors must provide "damage assessment" reports from the CIA, the State Department, the FBI, the Office of the National '
Isn't this the crux of it all? Absurdity. Moscow Show trials.
Why would they hide these assesments? Because they are full of it and everyone knows it.
This is all paid for by the best democracy that money can buy and it is twisted.
EFerrari
(163,986 posts)OnyxCollie
(9,958 posts)Response to Hissyspit (Original post)
snot This message was self-deleted by its author.
snot
(10,524 posts)that there was little or no damage, which may well be the case, since I'm guessing we'd have heard a lot more about it if there were.
Last edited Mon Jun 25, 2012, 08:51 PM - Edit history (2)
I think probably the case. We will also have to consider the accuracy of the assesments. Would be nice to read these one day.
What people need to understand, is that these actions of some of these people in our government compromise our security, they do not enhance it. What they do is not Mannings fault. He just exposed them for what they are.
History will write good things about Manning. I am pretty sure of that. In my eyes he is a good citizen and a good soldier. He is moral.
I hope his parents are proud of him. I know I am.
marasinghe
(1,253 posts)EFerrari
(163,986 posts)
freshwest
(53,661 posts)
tpsbmam
(3,927 posts)99th_Monkey
(19,326 posts)list somewhere, like from ACLU or an intel insider willing to provide it.
clang1
(884 posts)WillyT
(72,631 posts)
xchrom
(108,903 posts)
struggle4progress
(118,282 posts)The stance "I released a bunch of meaningless junk" undermines any potential claim of innocence, but it also undermines the idea that he is a significant and principled whistleblower, and a fortiori it undermines any potential necessity defense
msanthrope
(37,549 posts)Coombs is stuck...he's got a forensic trail he he can't explain away, and a client who won't fare well on the stand.
So, I suspect his first move will be to argue that the statutes in question contain a showing of harm element. They don't, but Coombs will attempt to use the 'damage report' assessments to bolster that claim. He will fail on that argument.
Next, since he won't be able to argue to the judge that a showing of harm is a necessary element, he will use the damage reports in his plea for jury nullification and later, sentence mitigation.
Using the damage reports, combined with his purported 'gender identity disorder', the defense will attempt to show that Manning was psychologically compromised, was not fit for duty, and in his distress, did no actual harm. This prong of the defense will attempt to blame the Army for not knowing how screwed up Manning was.
This is not a great defense. The basic argument is that 'Manning was so screwed up that he didn't know what he was doing, and he was incompetent doing it."
So, it is not surprising that the defense is attempting to delay trial with requests for documents. Currently, Manning is in medium security. He won't be after trial.
clang1
(884 posts)purported 'gender identity disorder'. Why don't they just call him a Trans and be done with it. Pffft.
I am sure they could tell his gender quite well as they had him stand nude at Parade Rest. It's sick.
Same sort of character assasination stuff as against Assange. Funny how all that works huh. They will do what they need to do at the trial.
It is telling that they attack the rights of LGBT people to attack Manning.
msanthrope
(37,549 posts)that raised the issue of gender identity disorder.
http://articles.baltimoresun.com/2011-12-18/news/bs-md-manning-20111218_1_manning-computer-security-pretrial-hearing
This is not the defense I would have raised, but I am not being paid by Mr. Manning's supporters.
Last edited Mon Jun 25, 2012, 11:21 PM - Edit history (7)
These things were said well before it came into the court room and you know it. FAIL
I read the article you cite, quite some time ago. What I took from that article was the Sorry Leadership surrounding Manning. Nothing more.
I mean is this a joke to you: "Capt. Thomas Cherepko, who managed the computer network at Manning's base, said he didn't know of anyone being disciplined for putting unauthorized programs on the classified computer drive, even though that was against the rules
Soldiers routinely stored music and games on a network used to store classified information, witnesses said. They also played pirated movies bought from Iraqis on the computers, according to the testimony."
You make your ownselves look bad. I would say I am astounded but that is how this stuff works I've found. It is what happens with bad morality. It can't hide it's own failures and shortcomings. It's sad. It smells like corruption smells to me.
Further I can only imagine the climate of the unit he was in, and it is not a unit I would have liked to be in.
LEADERSHIP FAIL
msanthrope
(37,549 posts)That does undercut the 'whistleblower' meme, but one can be the brave hero after one has beaten the rap, no?
ljm2002
(10,751 posts)...unless you think that one must harm national security in order to have a legitimate whistleblowing claim. Not sure how you would arrive at that position.
That video of our soldiers gunning down unarmed people in the street, including a cameraman, and people trying to rescue an injured man -- that looks like legitimate whistleblowing to me, and it does not cause harm to our national security although it does cause harm to our national reputation, as indeed it should.
clang1
(884 posts)people like these these are NOT even Democrats in my book. They are Republicans. The Democratic party is infested by people like these, just like so many of these threads here on DU are. PERIOD.
Damn neo-liberal and neo-conservative nonsense. I detest both.
bvar22
(39,909 posts)and I share your assessment of a previous post:
[font size=4]FAIL.[/font]
You will KNOW them by their WORKS,
not their bullshit.
Solidarity99!
struggle4progress
(118,282 posts)By Pauline Jelinek
Associated Press
Published: Saturday, Dec. 17 2011 2:22 p.m. MST
FORT MEADE, Md. — The young Army intelligence specialist accused of passing government secrets spent his 24th birthday in court Saturday as his lawyers argued his status as a gay soldier before the repeal of "don't ask, don't tell" played an important role in his actions.
Lawyers for Pfc. Bradley Manning began laying out a defense to show that his struggles as a gay soldier in an environment hostile to homosexuality contributed to mental and emotional problems that should have barred him from having access to sensitive material ...
But among the first issues to arise Saturday was whether Manning's sexual orientation is relevant to the case against him ...
Maj. Matthew Kemkes, a defense lawyer, asked Special Agent Toni Graham, an Army criminal investigator, whether she had talked to people who believed Manning was gay or found evidence among his belongings relating to gender-identity disorder ...
Graham said such questions were irrelevant to the investigation ...
http://www.deseretnews.com/article/700207980/Mannings-sexual-orientation-raised-in-hearing.html?pg=1
clang1
(884 posts)Last edited Tue Jun 26, 2012, 03:41 AM - Edit history (3)
This is unfortunate and probably a part of the overall bad leadership environment of the unit Manning was in.
"Lawyers for Pfc. Bradley Manning began laying out a defense to show that his struggles as a gay soldier in an environment hostile to homosexuality contributed to mental and emotional problems that should have barred him from having access to sensitive material ..."
I remember when I was in, and being in a unit where we knew we had homosexual people in the unit, and they were cool people, people left them alone. They caused no problems and it was tolerated. This was in a Combat Brigade as well. The difference is that we had good leadership. Manning obviously did not. They could not even perform the basics of protecting classified information in that unit. It must have been hell on earth for him there.
Something else some people do not want to understand or accept is that it is not just Manning's fault that these documents were not protected, it was the leaderships fault. Not Manning's if you want to get real damn technical about it. In the Army you are only as good as your team is. That is the way it works. Where are the other courts martial then? Why is no one else being prosecuted for this?
This is just all the bullshit that everyone knows it is. It's that simple. These are all breakdowns of leadership just like what got us into Iraq in the first place.
struggle4progress
(118,282 posts)won't be used by the defense IMO:
... They could not even perform the basics of protecting classified information in that unit. It must have been hell on earth for him there .... it is not just Manning's fault ... it was the leaderships fault ...
msanthrope
(37,549 posts)gay-bashed when his chats with Lamo indicate that he was the one using violence against a female superior (who manning thought was gay.)
clang1
(884 posts)People that meddle in certain affairs, should really know better what they are doing. Though I think some people already know that all they do is meddle.
clang1
(884 posts)Every leader in his chain of command should have been fired. Officer and NCO. At least they all weren't tortured though.
Army disciplined 15 over Bradley Manning and Wikileaks
http://www.politico.com/blogs/joshgerstein/1211/Army_disciplined_15_over_Bradley_Manning_and_Wikileaks.html
'The U.S. Army discliplined 15 people as a result of an internal investigation into the decisions and failures that put Pvt. Bradley Manning in a position to download and leak thousands of classified military reports and diplomatic cables he allegedly provided to WikiLeaks, an Army spokesman said Wednesday.'
struggle4progress
(118,282 posts)Yeah, that sounds like the appropriate defense to me
clang1
(884 posts)Those that are good soldiers cannot grow or even function effectively in such a climate. Everyone loses and the mission does not get accomplished.
clang1
(884 posts)No. The leadership was all 'effed-up'. Period.
msanthrope
(37,549 posts)as opposed to gp in max security.
To clarify about the order... I'm still not sure why anyone thinks this is a great 'victory' for Mr. Manning. All the prosecutors have to is document their efforts to procure the defense requests across 63 agencies. Coombs is going to get a list that he's going to bitch about some more to a court, and ask for another delay of trial.
Then the documents go to the judge. They don't go to the defense because of a prior order where Judge Lind has determined that she is going to see everything and then hand relevant material over to the defense for national security reasons.
So Mr. Manning's attorney will probably delay the proceedings again in late July. Which is pretty much the only strategy he's got, beyond the fact that his client was an incompetent whistleblower.
ljm2002
(10,751 posts)"...with requests for documents".
The article says, "For months, Manning's defense team has demanded access to reports by government agencies, including the CIA, that assessed the effect of the leak of classified documents to the WikiLeaks website."
The judge says the prosecution is obliged to turn over the requested documents, which they could have done months ago when the defense first requested them.
So who, again, delayed the trial?
msanthrope
(37,549 posts)And the order is not for the documents to be turned over to the defense, but rather for the prosecution to document their diligence in the pursuit of said documents. Coombs has asked for documents from 63 agencies.
Documents such as damage assessments will not go to the defense....they will go to the judge, first, who will review said documents and then decide if they contain exculpatory material for the defense.
It's delay, because every day spent in medium security, is a day spent outside of gp in maximum security.
ljm2002
(10,751 posts)msanthrope
(37,549 posts)ljm2002
(10,751 posts)...however, you still failed to address the point that it was the prosecution who refused to provide documents that were requested months ago, that the judge has now ordered them to provide.
Weak.
msanthrope
(37,549 posts)What she ordered is that the defense be provided with a log showing the prosecution's progress of gettting said documents from 63 agencies.
By prior order, any documents*** the prosecution obtains do not go to the defense....they go to the judge for in camera review.
http://www2.wjhl.com/news/2012/jun/25/manning-wikileaks-case-gets-help-from-judge-order-ar-2013354/
The devil is in the details. The prosecutors have until the end of July to produce the due diligence statements, but the 'damage assessments' still go directly to the judge. Edited to add--and of course, the agencies themselves can still litigate the issue in Lind's court.
***The documents referred to here are the 'damage assessment reports' and other material the defense thinks is exculpatory.
clang1
(884 posts)re: It's delay, because every day spent in medium security, is a day spent outside of gp in maximum security.
Sounds to me like another punishment fetishist talking. It's disgusting and if I don't read it right, it needs to be said anyway about some people. Really not much more reason to think about it than this.
msanthrope
(37,549 posts)Coombs is a pretty smart lawyer. He knows Manning's served time in medium security is counted against his eventual sentence. The more of it that is served in med sec, the better.
Perhaps you are unaware that military members convicted of serious felonies serve in maximum security?
Comrade Grumpy
(13,184 posts)msanthrope
(37,549 posts)clang1
(884 posts)
maddezmom
(135,060 posts)
roody
(10,849 posts)clang1
(884 posts)
Solly Mack
(90,764 posts)
clang1
(884 posts)Demand Coverage of Bradley Manning's
July 16th Pretrial Hearing
Dear Chris,
Will your local newspaper cover Bradley Manning's next pretrial hearing?
Earlier this month, Firedoglake activists launched over 12,000 letters to local newspapers to demand coverage of what's sure to be a historic case with far-reaching implications for journalists, activists and whistleblowers.
Some were even published, and public interest is picking up as the fight over access to evidence has caused Judge Denise Lind to push the court martial back as far as January, 2013. While Bradley will now be forced to endure additional months in pretrial confinement, the up-side is it gives us time to build awareness among the press and public before the court martial.
In anticipation of his next court appearance on July 16th, we're renewing our campaign to contact as many local papers as possible to demand coverage of Bradley Manning's case - but we need your help.
Can you send a quick letter to your local papers asking for coverage of Bradley Manning's court proceedings before his next hearing on July 16th?
Click here to contact your newspapers: http://action.firedoglake.com/page/speakout/manning-coverage
Can't write a letter? Donate $10+ to run Facebook ads recruiting Manning supporters to write letters to the editor.
Since Day One, it's been an uphill battle for the defense as the government's game of secrecy has been permitted to continue without restraint; the defense's efforts to dismiss the 'aiding the enemy' charge, dismiss all charges and compel critical witness testimony have been met with a failure that only affirms and emboldens government secrecy.
Manning's attorney David Coombs' continues to push back, most recently filing a motion to delay the court martial and compel the prosecution to outline the steps it has taken to disclose valuable evidence to Manning's defense.
FDL writer Kevin Gosztola, who has covered these proceedings since they began, outlines why this motion is important to the defense:
The defense argues the withholding of evidence will impact the defense's ability to prepare a witness list, file future motions to compel discovery of evidence, admit or authenticate evidence that could be used in the trial, enter a plea and delay a speedy trial motion. It requests that the judge, Army Col. Denise Lind, order the production of this material under a "relevant and necessary" standard that is dictates what evidence is and is not discoverable to the defense.1
Manning's defense team needs access to these materials to argue their case, and after over 760 days in pretrial confinement, it's obvious that his right to a 'speedy trial' will not be honored. In proceedings as choreographed and shrouded in secrecy as these, our best bet is to use this time to continue to work outside the courtroom, building support and interest in this case.
Hopefully, with your help, we will soon begin to see Bradley Manning's name appear in headlines across the country.
Please take a second to send a letter to your local papers asking for coverage of Bradley Manning's July 16th pre-trial hearing.
Can't write a letter? Donate $10+ to run Facebook ads recruiting Manning supporters to write letters to the editor.
Thanks in advance for helping us make the most out of this period before Bradley's court martial, which could take place in November or January.
In solidarity,
Brian Sonenstein
Director of Online Activism
Firedoglake.com
Sources:
1. Bradley Manning’s Defense Moves to Temporarily Suspend Court Martial. FDL Dissenter, 6/22/12.
