dagblog - Comments for "Bradley Manning Charged With 22 New Counts, Including Capital Offense"

I had not thought of the

A Guy Called LULU — Thu, 03 Mar 2011 16:42:22 +0000

I had not thought of the connection between the capital charge and the extradition of Assange.Good catch.

Greenwald comments today at Salon with some good legal analysis.

http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/glenn_greenwald/

Interesting. Poulsen has

kgb999 — Thu, 03 Mar 2011 06:46:50 +0000

In reply to Bradley Manning Charged With 22 New Counts, Including Capital Offense

Interesting. Poulsen has dropped from the Wired byline on all this stuff ever since Greenwald called him out on his FBI/Lamo involvement in the Manning arrest (looks like Wired even went back and pulled his name from some stuff originally published under both he and Zetter).

They are obviously reaching on some of it - trying to punk him into a plea and cooperation. The Espionage Act stuff might be a stretch in civilian court in light of the Rosen standard unless they come up with something that undermines the state of mind Manning professed in those chat logs. They are going to have a hell of a time proving he *intended* it to cause harm to US interests, *intended* to transmit it to a foreign power (another interesting question is exactly which "foreign power" was it Manning's intent to help? Surely they aren't going to call Wikileaks a "power" which clearly indicates a state actor). If he did as he said and encrypted everything - it seems unreasonable to assert he didn't take active precautions to keep it from falling into the hands of the enemy (again, unless it gets established by absurd precedent, we can't assert Wikileaks an "enemy power").

Can't wait to see (a) the evidence and (b) the charges analyzed by someone credible. I'll bet slapping a capital charge on him just complicated their Assange extradition endgame a bit.

Good highlight.

Sorry you didn't find it a

artappraiser — Thu, 03 Mar 2011 06:02:22 +0000

In reply to "The latter definitely gives

Sorry you didn't find it a useful inside look as I did. Despite the fact that of course the guy is is only going to talk about his successess and not his failures, it definitely gave me an overview that a lot of shit goes on outside the courtroom, equal to if not more than in the civilian system, that there is a ton of plea bargaining and all kinds of deals going on between prosecutors and defense lawyers. and it is not as straightforward or strict as it is often depicted. Plus it seems not that unusual for the juries to acquit even when all kinds of military bigwigs are testifying against the defendant.

Also they are not all sex cases, though those are the most common; here's a couple quick picks from the first page that are not:

June 2010, U.S. v. Army E-5 - Baumholder (Smith Barracks), Germany - Summary - Our client, an infantry soldier, was charged with multiple aggravated assaults on Iraqi insurgents/detainees and dereliction of duty. He allegedly stuck a gun in the mouths of 3 different Iraqi detainees and supposedly severely beat another in the back of an MRAP in Sadr City, Iraq causing grievous bodily harm. The prosecution charged the client and an Article 32 was scheduled on very short notice, giving Mr. Waddington only days to prepare and to be present to defend the client. This was done although the Government knew that the client was represented by Mr. Waddington. Mr. Waddington has a busy trial schedule and is located in the USA. In Mr. Waddington's opinion, which is based on years of experience in dealing with Army prosecutors, his experience in defending many court martial cases, his knowledge of the Smith Barracks prosecutors and his experience as a former JAG lawyer, this was done to catch the defense off guard and to deprive the client the ability to be prepared and to mount a defense. Mr. Waddington, believing that the prosecution was bluffing, cleared his schedule and rushed to Germany to defend the case with a few days notice. The defense team quickly investigated the background of the accusers, including a disgruntled 1LT (the main instigator of the allegations) and prepared to battle at the Article 32. The lead prosecutor expected us to delay the Article 32 (this info was told to Mr. Waddington by an Army JAG stationed at Smith Barracks). The defense aggressively fought the charges at the Article 32. The Article 32 officer recommended a trial on 2 of the 6 charges. The case was sent to the Commanding General with a recommendation that the case go to trial. The prosecution tried to get the charges referred (sent to a court martial). In Mr. Waddington's experience, the General/convening authority almost always follows the recommendation of the prosecution/SJA. In other words, if the prosecution wants to take the case to trial, then the General agrees. In an attempt to stop the court martial, the defense wrote and sent a memorandum to the Commanding General. In the memo, the defense explained why the charges should be dropped and why the case should not be sent to court martial. The General refused to send the case to court martial, against the recommendation of the Government.
Result: ALL CHARGES DISMISSED BY THE COMMANDING GENERAL
Nov 2007 - U.S. v. Army E-1 - Fort Gordon, Georgia - Soldier accused of running an international vehicle theft ring, making expensive sports cars "disappear" and filing theft reports and insurance claims, conspiracy to steal and attempted larceny of $39,000 from All State Insurance, and numerous other offenses. FBI and CID conducted a massive investigation. Started at Felony General Court Martial. Best offer was 24 months, then 18 months and a felony conviction. Fought charges at Article 32. Convinced 32 officer to reduce charges to a misdemeanor BCD special. Soldier confessed and FBI recorded 14 hours of his incriminating statements. Soldier had several past Field Grade Article 15s. Plead to misdemeanor charges without a deal in front of a judge. Beat the best plea deal offered by 9 months.

Oct 2007 - U.S. v. Army E-7 - Yongsan, South Korea - Senior NCOIC for 4 star GEN B.B. Bell and GEN LaPorte charged with 10 charges, facing over 70 years in prison. Command wanted to "make example" out of soldier. Charges included numerous counts of TDY fraud to New York City & DC x 4, larceny of travel funds for trips to NYC & DC x 4, conspiracy to steal Gov't funds, lying on reenlistment documents to cover up past arrests and probation. Fought all charges at jury trial. A General, 3 Colonels, and 2 CW4's testified against client. NOT GUILTY OF ALL CHARGES. FULL ACQUITTAL.

"The latter definitely gives

A Guy Called LULU — Thu, 03 Mar 2011 03:58:11 +0000

In reply to Here is a basic summary of

"The latter definitely gives one a much better idea of what really goes on in the military justice system.""

AA, Always glad when you weigh in. I do not see your comment I quoted as being supported in the second link you provided. I do not see anything there which tells me what "really goes on" in the military justice system as a whole and absolutely nothing that would inform me as to what to expect regarding Manning's prospects before the military court.
What I see is an advertisement for a legal firm specializing in military justice which reports many successes. What their win/loss percentage is not revealed. Almost all of the cases involve sex crimes. a category that I believe the military would like to see resolved as quietly as possible. Bradley Manning' case is of a very different category.

Here is a basic summary of

artappraiser — Thu, 03 Mar 2011 02:11:50 +0000

In reply to Bradley Manning Charged With 22 New Counts, Including Capital Offense

Here is a basic summary of how the court martial system works according to the book:

http://www.armytimes.com/community/ask_lawyer/military_askthelawyer_0113...

And here is a much more helpful page I ran across when researching the Manning story in the past. It's a listing of cases represented by a "Hard Hitting Aggressive" (they say) military justice defense lawyer firm, giving a short entry on each case on what the charges were and what they did for their clients and sometimes a little on how they did it:

http://www.ucmjdefense.com/military-defense-lawyer-recentcases.htm

The latter definitely gives one a much better idea of what really goes on in the military justice system.

As if the original counts

NCD — Thu, 03 Mar 2011 01:48:06 +0000

In reply to Bradley Manning Charged With 22 New Counts, Including Capital Offense

As if the original counts weren't enough.

Now that Manning can be put away for a millennium or so, perhaps a few government lawyers could be spared to look into who in the billionaires boys club on Wall Street could be held responsible for crashing our economy, which involved bigger crimes with worse consequences for this country than a enlisted kid exposing poorly secured diplomatic papers.