Bradley Manning, WikiLeaks Suspect, Denied Motion To Consolidate Charges

By DAVID DISHNEAU, THE ASSOCIATED PRESS

FORT MEADE, Md. -- A military judge rejected defense motions Thursday to consolidate some of the 22 charges against an Army private accused in the biggest leak of government secrets in U.S. history.

Col. Denise Lind said she would rule late in the afternoon on a defense motion to dismiss the most serious charge against Pfc. Bradley Manning - aiding the enemy - which carries a maximum life sentence.

Lind opened Thursday's session of pretrial proceedings by rejecting the defense's argument that the government had piled on duplicative charges to increase Manning's potential punishment. For example, the defense had argued that Manning's alleged theft of 380,000 Iraq war logs from a military database and his alleged transmission of those files to the anti-secrecy website WikiLeaks should have been charged as one offense, not two.

Lind said a theft can occur whether or not the stolen material is transmitted. She said the 10-year penalty for each of those offenses wasn't unreasonable given the "voluminous government records" involved. And she said that if the government had truly wanted to pile on charges, it could have alleged numerous aiding-the-enemy violations.

Lind said the defense could raise the consolidation motion again for sentencing purposes if Manning is convicted.

She denied another defense motion seeking to dismiss a count on the grounds that it was improperly charged. That count alleges that Manning wrongfully and wantonly caused intelligence to be published on the Internet, knowing it would be accessible to the enemy.

Lind also heard arguments on a government motion to bar any discussion at trial of whether the leaked material harmed U.S. interests. Prosecutor Maj. Ashden Fein argued that the government must prove only that Manning leaked the material knowing it could cause harm, regardless of whether it did.

The motion appeared to be aimed at blocking the defense's attempts to obtain classified reports compiled by the departments of Defense, State and Justice assessing the damage done by the WikiLeaks disclosures. Defense attorney David Coombs said the reports probably say the leaks did little or no damage; otherwise, the prosecution would be eager to discuss them.

Fein said that since the government doesn't have to prove damage, any courtroom discussion of damage assessments would waste the court's time.

"Just because a damage assessment might say damage did occur or didn't occur, it's completely irrelevant" to the charges, Fein said.

In seeking dismissal of the "aiding the enemy" count, the defense argued Manning had no "evil intent" to help al-Qaida when he allegedly sent hundreds of thousands of classified Iraq and Afghanistan war reports and State Department diplomatic cables to the anti-secrecy website WikiLeaks. Manning stated in an online chat with a confidant-turned-informant that he leaked the information because,"I want people to see the truth."

Prosecutors said they would need only to prove that Manning knew that the enemy would see the material and that he sent it without authorization.

Manning hasn't entered a plea to any of the charges. He also hasn't yet decided whether he will be tried by a judge or a jury. His trial is set for Sept. 21 through Oct. 12.

The 24-year-old Oklahoma native was ordered court-martialed after he was accused of downloading the documents, diplomatic cables and video clips, then sending them to WikiLeaks. He was working as an intelligence analyst in Baghdad when authorities say he copied classified material from government computers in late 2009 and early 2010.

The material WikiLeaks published included cockpit video of a 2007 U.S. Apache helicopter attack that killed a number of civilians, including a Reuters news photographer and his driver. The U.S. government says the civilian deaths were accidental.

Prosecutors acknowledged in court Wednesday that the helicopter video was not classified, although Manning allegedly got it from a Defense Department computer network intended for classified material. He is charged with "having unauthorized possession" of the video clip.

Manning has been in pretrial confinement since he was charged in May 2010. He has been held since last April at Fort Leavenworth in Kansas.

His earlier treatment at a Marine Corps base caused support for him to swell. The Quantico, Va., brig commander kept Manning confined 23 hours a day in a single-bed cell, citing safety and security concerns. For several days in March 2011, he was forced to sleep naked, purportedly for injury prevention, before he was issued a suicide-prevention smock.

Manning's supporters have raised funds to place posters in the Washington Metro subway system this week portraying him as a whistleblower, patriot and hero.

Also on HuffPost:

Comments

[porsche996]

09:36 PM on 04/26/2012

Whatever PFC Manning is convicted of in the kangaroo courtsmartial...IMO will be overturned by the future scotus........ on appeal primarily because of his CIC's blabber as recorded prejudicialy.

If not...somehow....we are all royally screwed....all.....every single citizen one of us in America....OBL wins...game over.

[Supersteel]

02:21 PM on 04/26/2012

Lamo told Wired he had given money to WikiLeaks in the past, and that the decision to go to the authorities had not been an easy one. He said he believed lives were in danger. He told The Sunday Times: "I get approached by people [hackers] on pretty much a daily basis confessing to crimes. I don't turn them in, because most of them are crimes of curiosity and have no real impact on people's lives or livelihoods. It's when someone comes to me and says, 'Hi, my name's Brad, and I'd like to tell you about my state treason' that the issue becomes fuzzy. I believed he was leaking stuff that was endangering lives."

[porsche996]

09:30 PM on 04/26/2012

The former VP leaked stuff that endangered American lives, fact......not hearsay in unsworn testimony.

[Supersteel]

09:13 AM on 04/27/2012

We have the e-mails. That's not hearsay. He's admitted it. He's confessed. He didn't hide his identity, he publicly revealed it.

[Supersteel]

02:15 PM on 04/26/2012

i wouldn't mind going to prison for the rest of my life, or being executed so much, if it wasn't for the possibility of having pictures of me ... plastered all over the world press ... as [a] boy ... **** How about a trade? In exchange for his execution, we agree to dress him as a girl when he gets the needle.

[Supersteel]

02:09 PM on 04/26/2012

Manning is a mess of a human being. His mother was mentally ill, his father practically abandoned him for weeks at a time, he's got anxiety and social disorders, he punched a female mitilary woman in the face, thinks he's a girl trapped in a man's body, set up sites in the name of a female alter-ego, obsessively harassed ex-boyfriends, threatened his father's new wife with a knife, had frequent breakdowns, and this is all before. The army was as whacky as he is to have kept him around. he had one thing in life-skill with computers. Otherwise he was mentally ill.

[porsche996]

10:01 PM on 04/26/2012

The person responsible for vetting him as fit for a security clearance should be in the cell alongside Manning. Is the failed background screen indicative of a whole sub-culture within the Army that he that he was enabled by?

[Supersteel]

09:14 AM on 04/27/2012

Poor vetting is not a crime but the peopel should be fired.

[ElaineWA]

06:04 PM on 04/27/2012

We don't give mentally ill people "the needle". Do we?

[justan olnamvet]

01:05 PM on 04/26/2012

I watched the helo episode. The best words for it were used on a segment of the Civil War series by Ken Burns...... "Just Plain Murder".

[porsche996]

10:05 PM on 04/26/2012

A murderous accident.

[surfinnonreality]

12:23 PM on 04/26/2012

From the Constitution. I hope the libs don't need a link.

Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court.

The Congress shall have power to declare the Punishment of Treason, but no Attainder of Treason shall work Corruption of Blood, or Forfeiture except during the Life of the Person attainted.

[Hugh-Gee]

02:35 PM on 04/26/2012

Thank you for posting this.

The question is: what constitutes giving "Aid and Comfort" to Enemies? In an expansive view, it could include any antiwar demonstration or public criticism of the country's leaders. (In days long past, the Supreme Court very nearly read it that way.) In a more restrictive view, one could only be convicted of treason if s/he pulled a Robert Hanssen—sold classified military secrets to the Soviets or other enemies.

Manning's case, clearly, falls somewhere between those two extremes. It will be months before we find out how the military court see it.

[SublimeAntithesis]

03:08 PM on 04/26/2012

No we don't need a link. But you may want to send one to your cohorts in the Senate and Congress as they certainly do not have a clue as to what it contains.

[ceccm]

12:00 PM on 04/26/2012

so informing the public on the activities of their military is aiding the enemy? only if they believe we (the informed American people) are an enemy to their ideology of expansion and cover ups. i support our troops, not the institution. it has lied to us too much and now trying to punish someone with life imprisonment for calling them out on it.

[Phreaked]

11:56 AM on 04/26/2012

In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act

[woodshoe]

11:55 AM on 04/26/2012

but he took an oath! o my

this really makes obvious the problem with oaths generally.. they are designed to pretend to a sort of 'enduring self' that has primacy when compared to the real living changing oath taker.

i hope that those who offer oaths to what they LATER discover to be shady, violent, corrupt, deceitful, or criminal organizations.. will have the DECENCY to NOT allow such an oath to give them pause from making public comment about the true nature of that organization.

no doubt for those who remain under the spell of their own personal oath.. it will follow that they consider it their duty to incarcerate this individual based on that oath. so be it for them.. but hopefully this will not prevent the millions who took no such oath from jailbreaking him the first opportunity they have.

not taking oaths to begin with would be a better solution,.. but if you have taken oaths..please DO NOT allow your oaths to get in the way of doing what is right.. do not assume the will of the organization.. keep freethinking,

[Bradley Greig Smith]

12:08 PM on 04/26/2012

The way I read the oath he would have been bound to reveal any information that had been classified simply to cover up illegal activity. Furthermore, while in the military you are NOT allowed to follow any illegal orders. So if it's illegal to cover up activity then it was his duty to reveal it.

[WILLIEMOJORISIN]

01:37 PM on 04/26/2012

When I was in the Navy they told us to follow all orders and take it up through the chain of command later if we thought any order had been illegal.

[Omishinji]

04:28 AM on 04/29/2012

Of the 750,000 documents Manning is suspected of have given to Wikileaks it is doubtful that he read or understood less than 1% of them. The cables alone covered a wide variety of topics, from observations for other nations, to facilities that U.S. was concerned of being targets of terrorist attacks.

Part of Manning agreement was not to reveal sensitive information point.

Manning was never in a position to follow "illegal orders" he worked on a computer, with no combat duties. No one ordered Manning to send the information to Wikileaks.

The majority of the information leaked by Manning didn't reveal activities that could be considered illegal, let alone checked by Manning to ensure that he was being a "whistle blower."

[surfinnonreality]

12:26 PM on 04/26/2012

I guess no one can accept your word as honorable then. I hope you never have to go to court.

[woodshoe]

01:33 PM on 04/26/2012

on the contrary.. any individual who knows me personally should have the intellectual facilities necessary to determine for their own needs and from their own standpoint whether "my word" is honorable,.. if they would be swayed instead based on whether i would swear fealty to violent secretive authoritarian organizations.. then i probably do not seek their affinity anyhow.

freethinkers can base their trust on familiarity and may do so on a moment to moment basis with respect to the subject at hand,.. third party assurances amount to ZERO and properly so as they only tell us the degree to wish an individual is willing to subvert his or her own instincts and replace them with the will and interests of an authoritarian institution over the interests of natural persons.

[snewell]

11:55 AM on 04/26/2012

MANNING SHOULD BE GETTING WHISTLEBLOWER PROTECTION!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! NOT PROSECUTION!!!!!!!! WE KNOW WHO SHOULD BE GETTING PROSECUTION!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Hugh-Gee]

12:51 PM on 04/26/2012

Dude, your Caps Lock key is stuck.

[mass maritimer]

11:50 AM on 04/26/2012

I really want to yell at him to fix his tie....then I want to free him

[Bradley Greig Smith]

11:53 AM on 04/26/2012

He probably didn't have a mirror to look into, at best a lousy grey metal one that blurs everything. Someone needs to fix it for him.

[mikesw]

11:45 AM on 04/26/2012

No matter how much the prosecution abuses and bungles, there is barely a slap on the wrist from the judge.

The prosecution has submitted for discovery only 12 pages --yes, TWELVE PAGES-- of evidence for over two years --yes, TWO YEARS-- of investigation!!! Unbelievable.

You cannot prosecute someone in a court of law with "secret evidence" which even the accused cannot see or know about. Seriously, what on earth is the prosecution thinking????

And more seriously, why is this kind of farce allowed to go forward??????

[Supersteel]

02:25 PM on 04/26/2012

Because the courts don't like traitors either and they give a wide berth to the military. the fact is, he's admitted to the acts so it's only a matter of time.

[Sansculotte]

11:44 AM on 04/26/2012

"Aiding the Enemy"??? How does his releasing info about US military atrocities "aid the enemy"?
I think this guy's a true American hero. The real criminals got promoted.

[fco1922]

11:41 AM on 04/26/2012

I love all the posts accusing Manning of treason. Has anyone bothered to read the Constitution, where treason is defined. Manning has not committed treason and, indeed, is not accused of such.

[UofOLaw]

12:05 PM on 04/26/2012

"whoever, owing allegiance to the United States, levies war against them or adheres to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort within the United States or elsewhere, is guilty of treason and shall suffer death, or shall be imprisoned not less than five years and fined under this title but not less than $10,000; and shall be incapable of holding any office under the United States."

Manning owes allegiance to the United States as a member of the military. This country is at war. Manning gave aid and comfort to the enemy by attempting to discredit the United States and to harm its efforts in conducting military and diplomatic operations. There are witnesses to the conduct, more than the two required. The only reason he is not being tried for treason is likely pressure from the White House as his conduct surely fits the statute.

[Supersteel]

02:13 PM on 04/26/2012

few ever are but he's pretty close. Colloquial treason if not to the letter of the law. He's charged with enough anyway.

[oil patch]

11:40 AM on 04/26/2012

treason is treason is treason.
execute

[woodshoe]

12:07 PM on 04/26/2012

somebody remind this guy that this is a nation-state FOUNDED by seditious traitors please.. this is the reason the bar is set so very high for that particular charge.. manning's activities do not even vaguely approach that bar.

[traceymarie]

12:22 PM on 04/26/2012

and your are foolish