Slashdot Mirror
Thomas Drake Innocent of All Ten Original Charges
decora writes "NPR, and dozens of other media sources, are reporting that NSA IT whistleblower Thomas Andrews Drake is innocent of all 10 original charges against him; including the 5 Espionage Act charges for 'retention' of 'national defense information.' Drake stared down the government to the last minute, rejecting deal after deal, because he 'refused to plea bargain with the truth.' The judge had even recently ruled that there was no evidence that Drake passed classified information to a reporter. In the end, he has agreed that he committed a misdemeanor: 'unauthorized access to a computer.' It is unknown what this means for the other non-spy espionage cases that Obama's DOJ currently has pending (Kim, Sterling, Manning), or the Grand Jury that is currently meeting to discuss Espionage Act charges related to WikiLeaks."
I found the following article from the New Yorker to provide considerable information about what led up to the charges:
New Yorker: The Secret Sharer
But what about the impact? There's no denying our (the US) enemies are happy about it.
Dear US, not everything is about you. Kinda fighting a civil war right now.
Hugs and kisses,
Muammar Kadafi
No, you aren't assumed innocent. The courts are supposed to presume innocence while in front of a jury. There is no "duty" for anyone not actively presenting to a jury while a court is in session to presume or assume innocence.
Further, assuming (or presuming) something is irrelevant to whether it's true. OJ killed Nicole. He is guilty of that act. He was found not guilty in a court of law. None of those are contradictory statements of fact (whether they are true is something that can be debated elsewhere).
If the cops presumed you innocent, they'd never arrest you. If the prosecutor presumed you innocent, they'd never file charges. If the judge presumed you innocent, he'd not let the trial proceed. The presumption of innocence is what the jury is supposed to do, and nobody else in the entire system (and certainly nobody outside the justice system) is expected to presume innocence, though they are expected to act that way under reasonable rules of the court when in front of the jury.
Learn to love Alaska
Maybe NSA did have a case, but if they wanted to make that case, they would have had to admit that the allegations were essentially true. Unacceptable option.
But even if the allegations were completely bogus, confirming that would be just as bad a leak in terms of exposing NSA's capabilities. Equally unacceptable option.
It was a classic Catch-22. (Best catch there is.) Both sides get to walk away with a win: NSA keeps its secrets to itself, and Yossarian lives. Well-played on both sides.
I saw a man upon a stair
A man in court who wasn't there
To testify for NSA.
(The winning move was not to play.)
If you shine a light on government waste, incompetence or malfeasance be prepared for the government to use its unlimited checkbook and unaccountable law enforcement types to make your life a living hell.
Yes it is; you're innocent until proven guilty, regardless of how much prosecutors, police, and the government don't want to believe it sometimes. If the government can't be burdened to prove that he's guilty, he's innocent.