Slashdot Mirror
WikiLeaks Gives $15k To Bradley Manning Defense
wiredmikey writes "The Web site supporting Bradley Manning, the Army soldier charged with leaking a massive number of US classified information to WikiLeaks, posted an announcement on its site today, saying that WikiLeaks had transferred $15,100 to the legal trust account of Manning's attorney. WikiLeaks has been publicly soliciting donations specifically for the expenses of Manning's legal defense following his arrest in May 2010. The contribution by WikiLeaks brings the total funds raised and transferred to Bradley's civilian legal defense team, led by attorney David Coombs, to over $100,000. Supporters say that a 'vigorous defense' for Manning is estimated to cost $115,000."
Now that they are giving him money for legal defense, a good lawyer can say that it shows that they were in fact working together. IANAL btw
Not at all. Whenever the ACLU or the EFF defends someone pro bono, they are not thrown into the lawsuit with the defendant. It's certainly not criminal to donate money to defend a cause you believe in and, thanks to the SCOTUS, these donations by WikiLeaks and others are actually just an expression of free speech.
I live in constant fear of the Coming of the Red Spiders.
Manning is fucked no matter what basically. The UCMJ doesn't have a "Because I though it should be released," exception to the rules on classified materials. Also, as implied by the UCMJ thing, he'll be court-marshaled which means tried by a military court. Trying for nullification by a sympathetic jury is more or less impossible.
His case is pretty open and shut when you get down to it. I can't see what an expensive defense will do for him.
A token amount, just for appearances. The simple fact is that WikiLeaks no longer needs Pfc Manning, and the handwriting is pretty much on the wall for him, anyway. The best he can expect is a dishonorable discharge and a short stay at USDB in Leavenworth. Giving him any more would be a waste of resources they may need to defend Assange in Sweden.
Wikileaks should operate like a newspaper and Not be involved with defending the informants. Now they can be accused of colluding with the guy who stole US documents. Wikileaks should just be REPORTING the documents, and nothing else.
They just shot themselves in the foot.
FOX NEWS.com should be BANNED from television and internet. Have the Congress take it over and give us Truespeak.
Due Process? How, pray tell, has he been deprived of due process? He's in pre-trial confinement, awaiting his GCM.
I do not read or respond to AC's. If you want a discussion, log in. Otherwise, don't waste your time.
For one thing, the complete lack of any mention of Area 51 or the JFK assassination shows that the US Military Industrial complex is even more secretive than we thought!</sarcasm>
Well, he is already being punished; it is to the point where he has to be given antidepressants just to be kept alive. He is not allowed to have bedsheets, last I checked (I assume this is because he might try to hang himself). He has been in solitary confinement for many months now, which is extremely difficult to endure and which can have long lasting or even permanent effects on people.
I suppose there might be some disagreement on the meaning of "right to a speedy trial" or "due process," but I am a bit confused as to how the treatment of Manning passes constitutional muster. I understand that he is subject to military law, not civilian law, but it is still troubling.
Palm trees and 8
He will face a court martial, but this isn't a capital offense. Individuals that have been caught and convicted of providing information like that in the past have faced long prison terms. There's a spy still in prison since the mid 80s for spying on the US for Israel.
Sure he'll likely spend decades behind bars, but he's not facing any capital charges here.
What money? The money that Paypal is sitting on or the money that Mastercard won't allow to be donated?
Military Prisons are pretty much controlled environments. It's prison with the bonus of having military rules applied to it.
Rather than taking near minimum wage prison guards, military prison guards are hand picked from Military Police MOS from all the branches and have low guard to prisoner ratios, Navy Brigs are like 1 guard for every 1.75 prisoners, vs 1 guard for 250 prisoners in many state prisons.
http://usmilitary.about.com/od/justicelawlegislation/a/leavenworth.htm
I had a buddy from High School who did a tour there as a guard, said they were the most squared away prisoners he'd ever seen.
They should not be anything wrong to help someone defend himself to face a trial, whatever the crime he is accused of. According to justice, Manning is presumed innocent. Giving to his defend fund doesn't make anyone his accomplice.
Even someone who has obviously committed an horrible crime has right to be defended.
Here's what they can do to get Assange, and part of the reason his organization is paying some of Manning's legal bills :
After giving Manning 'protective solitary confinment' (aka coercive torture) for enough time, they'll get Manning to claim that Assange and him worked together to get those government documents. Manning will be offered a deal for a limited amount of prison time if he serves as a 'government witness' against Assange. Given the last 7 months have been hell on earth for Manning, turning such an offer down would be incredibly difficult. Even if there is no actual communication logs showing this, the mere testimony of Manning (under duress) is a "witness statement" that a grand jury can use.
Once they get Assange dragged into U.S. custody, they can lock him up in jail for years while federal prosecutors file motions for extensions and things. Then, finally, they can give him a show trial where the jury is stacked with people who hate sex criminals. (even though Assange would not be accused of such crime, the jurors would think of him as a rapist).
Even if he were acquitted (the case as I outlined it is very weak) he would be out hundreds of thousands of dollars in legal defense fees and years off his natural lifespan. The Federal government cannot be sued to reclaim either of these things unless Assange were able to show that the government KNEW he was innocent. (which if they have a coerced statement from Manning, above, the government doesn't have to pay)
So in a nutshell : they can punish Assange severely for his actions even if they are never able to convict him of a crime. And imagine the mental anguish : Assange won't know for months or years during this process if he is going to be convicted and made to rot in prison for decades.
This kind of thing happens day in and day out in the U.S. We make more people rot in confinement than the worst despotic regimes in history. And there are many effective ways to get around the protections offered by your 'rights', making them nearly meaningless in practice.
He has his health closely monitored and is being tended to by Doctors, daily. Anti-depressants during solitary confinement seems prudent to keep him from suffering terribly, and considering the Adrian Lamo chatlogs I would say the Doctors would be negligent if they weren't medicating him.
Should they put him in with the general military prison population? He's not been found guilty. I don't think exposing him to stranger-danger-bad-touch is a smart decision.
He was arrested in May, charged in July. His trial is scheduled for this Spring. That sucks, but it doesn't appear to be abnormally slow considering the general speed of the US legal system. Perhaps the Military is different and you could comment on how fast his trial should be? How long is the minimum fair allotment of time for his lawyers to construct their defense?
Or do you just think that he should have been immediately taken out behind a shed and shot?
He has different processes due, not "no right to due process". See the UCMJ and MCM for reference.
"This post is an artistic work of fiction and falsehood. Only a fool would take anything posted here as fact."
Obviously they didn't take the classified government information seriously if a private had access to it, and managed to steal it by pretending he was listening to Lady Gaga.
In some countries, at least, torture is not part of "due process". The US is not one of those countries.
The kind of solitary confinement being used is torture even without the alleged sleep deprivation. This was realized by Charles Dickens; it's nothing new. So, "due process"?
Let's see, the 10-second Google search reveals the July 2010 charges:
You must be new here. Slashdot has moderation. If you're lost and looking for the "like" buttons, here's what you do: head over that way, take the second on the right, push your way through the crowds of teenagers, past the drunk party photos and lonely people clamoring for attention. There you will find facebook.
No, the best lawyer says, "Ladies and Gentlemen of the supposed jury, this is Chewbaca. Chewbacca is a Wookiee from the planet Kashyyyk. But Chewbacca lives on the planet Endor. Now think about it; that does not make sense!"
- None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license. -- John Milton
They cant, he did not technically do a treasonous act. I suggest you learn military law about Treason and not listen to idiots with the last name Palin.
Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
That's a silly claim. Insider threats are impossible to defend against completely. After all, if nobody has access to the information, it is useless. Even the banking industry runs on the principle that you cannot stop employees from stealing, but you can usually make their actions auditable so you can catch them afterwards. Yes the DoD can be faulted for not following the principle of least privilege, on the other hand the US security apparatus was criticized after 911 for being too compartmentalized and thus failing to put all the pieces together. They can do better, but ultimately it is a difficult problem.
Exactly where has PFC Manning been denied due process as defined under the UCMJ? Please cite the specific section instead of trying for sensational statements.
He has been denied a speedy trial and has suffered punitive treatment in pre-trial detention. This violates Article 10 UCMJ and R.C.M. 707.
Due Process? How, pray tell, has he been deprived of due process? He's in pre-trial confinement, awaiting his GCM.
From: http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/glenn_greenwald/2010/12/14/manning
From the beginning of his detention, Manning has been held in intensive solitary confinement. For 23 out of 24 hours every day -- for seven straight months and counting -- he sits completely alone in his cell. Even inside his cell, his activities are heavily restricted; he's barred even from exercising and is under constant surveillance to enforce those restrictions. For reasons that appear completely punitive, he's being denied many of the most basic attributes of civilized imprisonment, including even a pillow or sheets for his bed (he is not and never has been on suicide watch). For the one hour per day when he is freed from this isolation, he is barred from accessing any news or current events programs. Lt. Villiard protested that the conditions are not "like jail movies where someone gets thrown into the hole," but confirmed that he is in solitary confinement, entirely alone in his cell except for the one hour per day he is taken out.
We always knew Comcast was corrupt, here's the proof: http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1909890&cid=34545432
Probably solitary is for his own protection, and keeping him alive is the responsibility of the justice system, so if he's on suicide watch, that means being deprived of things he can use to KILL HIMSELF WITH.
That would be fine, except he's not on suicide watch. He hasn't been since the first 2 weeks or so of his confinement. The officers in charge of his detention said that he was a model prisoner.
The only thing troubling here is that this guy's so upset with his circumstances that he's trying to kill himself. Anything else stems from that fact.
I find the fact that he is not allowed to exercise in his cell "troubling". How does that help keep him alive? He also must respond every five minutes that he is ok. Have you ever tried reading a book or watching tv with someone asking you every 5 minutes if you are ok?
http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/glenn_greenwald/2010/12/23/manning/index.html
Manning was spying on America for Americans! He felt that the citizens needed to know what was being kept secret from them. The guy was sold a bill of goods about military service, and when he was in the thick of it he realized that he and everyone else had been lied to.
Blar.
Not at all. Whenever the ACLU or the EFF defends someone pro bono, they are not thrown into the lawsuit with the defendant. It's certainly not criminal to donate money to defend a cause you believe in and, thanks to the SCOTUS, these donations by WikiLeaks and others are actually just an expression of free speech.
And if that were the extent of their involvement with him, you'd be right. However, his relationship with Leaks goes well beyond what you describe. As a point of distinction, the ACLU and EFF generally don't publish illegally obtained materials from the people they defend.
Then how did they hide the trebuchet in the prison yard? Squared away, my ass .
I think you answered your own question. Ouch!
All the time. I'm a married man.
I'm not a coward by any name.
The military and intelligence communities didn't seem to mind the recent release of Russian agents. Maybe they didn't transfer any valuable secrets, but they were working for Russia.
It's quite normal to do that; often in exchange for our spies there, which is what happened in this case. Spying for your own country is not treason; and there are accepted norms for how to treat foreign agents. Pollard, Walker, et.al. were Americans entrusted with our secrets and sold themselves out. That is very different than a foreign agent coming to the US to spy.
I'm a consultant - I convert gibberish into cash-flow.
Read up on the conditions under which Manning is being held; it's not for his safety, it's psychological torture. Whether the goal is to break him so he'll say whatever they want, or just to leave him a ruined shell as a warning to the next person who might try to embarrass the U.S. government, there is nothing "standard" about prolonged solitary confinement, sleep deprivation, or denial of exercise. Convicted murderers and rapists are not dealt with this harshly; there's no way that an accused whistle-blower should be.
The requirement for a speedy trail is exactly in part so that the state can't implement the "sentence first, we'll have the trial later and figure out what he's guilty of then" strategy they are employing. Manning has been held for seven months; courts have generally held that delays longer that six to eight months are unconstututional. If the feds have a case, put it to the jury; if they don't, let Manning go.
Tom Swiss | the infamous tms | my blog
You cannot wash away blood with blood