Page 1 of 3
Manning sentenced to 35 years
Posted: Wed Aug 21, 2013 4:36 pm
by Grim Reaper
The New York Times wrote:
Manning Sentenced to 35 Years for Leaking Government Secrets
FORT MEADE, Md. — A military judge on Wednesday sentenced Pfc. Bradley Manning to 35 years in prison for providing more than 700,000 government files to WikiLeaks, a gigantic leak that lifted the veil on military and diplomatic activities around the world.
The sentence is the longest ever handed down in a case involving a leak of United States government information to be reported to the public. Private Manning will apparently be eligible for parole in slightly more than eight years.
In a two-minute hearing on Wednesday morning, the judge, Army Col. Denise R. Lind, also said that Private Manning would be reduced in rank from private first class to E1, a lower rank of private and the lowest rank in the military. She said he would forfeit all pay and would be dishonorably discharged. She did not impose a fine.
Before the sentencing, Private Manning sat leaning forward with his hands folded, occasionally whispering to his lawyer, David Coombs. His sister and his aunt sat quietly behind him. When Colonel Lind read the sentence, Private Manning stood, showing no expression. He did not make a statement. Mr. Coombs is expected to speak on his behalf to reporters later today.
Only quoted part of the article since it's a fairly long one. Bradley Manning will also receive a credit for 1,294 days (about 3 1/2 years) to cover time already served while awaiting trial and his case will automatically be sent into an appeals process which could possibly reduce his sentence.
Re: Manning sentenced to 35 years
Posted: Wed Aug 21, 2013 7:47 pm
by Gob
Better than he expected I bet.
We're lucky Jim is on holiday!

Re: Manning sentenced to 35 years
Posted: Wed Aug 21, 2013 8:23 pm
by Crackpot
Well he was asking for 25 the prosecution 60
Re: Manning sentenced to 35 years
Posted: Thu Aug 22, 2013 11:06 am
by Daisy
So should Bradley Manning have ever been in the army, and should his sentence be mitigated because of this?
The trial of Bradley Manning has cast light on how he came to leak thousands of classified documents, and on his troubled childhood in a family splintered by divorce and alcoholism.
Susan Manning liked vodka - it was easier to hide. "If you put vodka in certain drinks, you can't really smell it," said her daughter, Casey Major, in a courtroom in Fort Meade, Maryland, last week.
She also liked rum and beer - and, really, whatever was in the house.
When she got pregnant for the second time, friends and family had mixed feelings. One relative, Debra Van Alstyne, testifying in court, said: "At first I said, 'Oh great.' Then I thought, 'Oh no.'"
At the time, Major was 11. Sitting in the witness stand, Major, now 36 and a homemaker who lives in Oklahoma City, counted on her fingers - adding up the weeks that her mother was pregnant - and drinking. She put her hands in her lap.
"At least through the first trimester," she said. Her brother weighed about 6lb (2.7kg) when he was born.
Continue reading the main story
Wikileaks revelations
Manning downloaded thousands of classified documents while posted to Iraq
These were passed to Wikileaks, which published war records from Iraq and Afghanistan in 2010, and US diplomatic cables in 2011
He was convicted of 20 charges, but acquitted of aiding the enemy
Manning given 35 years for leaks
Excerpts of leaked Iraq war logs
Excerpts of leaked US Afghan military records
Pte First Class Bradley Manning, 25, showed signs of foetal alcohol syndrome, said Capt David Moulton, a clinical psychiatrist, who testified in court that day.
Moulton described Manning's facial features that characterised the syndrome, such as his smooth, thin upper lip, and looked over at him in the courtroom.
Manning has been found guilty of 20 charges, including multiple counts of espionage, theft of government data and computer fraud. He will be demoted to E1, a lower rank of private and the lowest rank in the military.
On Tuesday he was sentenced to 35 years, significantly less than the 90 that he could have spent in prison.
Fetal alcohol syndrome (FAS) is a pattern of mental and physical defects that can develop in a fetus in association with high levels of alcohol consumption during pregnancy. Alcohol crosses the placental barrier and can stunt fetal growth or weight, create distinctive facial stigmata, damage neurons and brain structures, which can result in psychological or behavioral problems, and cause other physical damage.The main effect of FAS is permanent central nervous system damage, especially to the brain. Developing brain cells and structures can be malformed or have development interrupted by prenatal alcohol exposure; this can create an array of primary cognitive and functional disabilities (including poor memory, attention deficits, impulsive behavior, and poor cause-effect reasoning) as well as secondary disabilities (for example, predispositions to mental health problems and drug addiction). Alcohol exposure presents a risk of fetal brain damage at any point during a pregnancy, since brain development is ongoing throughout pregnancy.
Re: Manning sentenced to 35 years
Posted: Thu Aug 22, 2013 2:27 pm
by MajGenl.Meade
a) Yes but never higher than E1
2) No. Best he doesn't mix with free people and perhaps breed

Re: Manning sentenced to 35 years
Posted: Thu Aug 22, 2013 2:48 pm
by Daisy
As it seems that Bradley wishes to change sex it's likely 2 will never happen.
Re: Manning sentenced to 35 years
Posted: Thu Aug 22, 2013 3:44 pm
by Big RR
My guess is that the sex change/hormone replacement request is timed in an attempt to force Obama's hand toward pardoning Manning or commuting the sentence; but I'll bet it will do nothing with an Obama embarrassed by the information released (and, face it, that is the extent of the damage done here--even the court martial didn't find him guilty of aiding the enemy). Face it, he's not running again, and even the an election didn't stop him form summarily ordering the execution of a US citizen rather than have him brought to trial; he'll just sit on his hands here, as per usual.
Re: Manning sentenced to 35 years
Posted: Thu Aug 22, 2013 3:48 pm
by Crackpot
They ruling on "aiding the enemy" was ruled on intent not effect.
Re: Manning sentenced to 35 years
Posted: Thu Aug 22, 2013 4:18 pm
by Big RR
Well, I haven't seen the opinion (indeed I'm not sure there was one other than the statement of the sentnence), but the original charge (as I understood it) was that he transmitted information which he knew (intent was not required) could end up in the hands of the enemy and could aid it. Knowingly is much less difficult to prove than intent is, and knowledge can be implied, especially where the conduct complained about is significantly egregious. We have no way of knowing whether the court took the value of the information (to the enemy) into account when it considered the charge, but I would think it had to. And, at least in part, I see the verdict as a repudiation of the government's original position that the information leaked was highly confidential and put US troops or other individuals at risk. If you've seen statements of the court to the contrary, please post a link--I'd like to see them.
Re: Manning sentenced to 35 years
Posted: Thu Aug 22, 2013 5:25 pm
by Grim Reaper
Daisy wrote:So should Bradley Manning have ever been in the army, and should his sentence be mitigated because of this?
Well, it's not like anyone forced him to sign up. He did pass training and that's about all the Army cares about. But his job required a top secret security clearance, and I'm betting the background checks are going to be a little more thorough from now on.
Re: Manning sentenced to 35 years
Posted: Thu Aug 22, 2013 7:05 pm
by Daisy
My point being that shouldn't tougher psych evaluations take place before anyone joins the armed forces? Whilst Manning leaked documents, others have turned on their squad mates, and many more have taken their own lives.
Re: Manning sentenced to 35 years
Posted: Thu Aug 22, 2013 9:23 pm
by Gob
Re: Manning sentenced to 35 years
Posted: Fri Aug 23, 2013 9:22 pm
by Gob
Chelsea Football Club have announced that they are to change their name to Bradley Football Club, and they'd like the world to acknowledge them as men from now on!
Re: Manning sentenced to 35 years
Posted: Fri Aug 23, 2013 9:42 pm
by The Hen
Shouldn't the title of this thread be "WOManning sentenced to 35 years"?
Re: Manning sentenced to 35 years
Posted: Fri Aug 23, 2013 10:58 pm
by Joe Guy
Big RR wrote:If you've seen statements of the court to the contrary, please post a link--I'd like to see them.
Here's a
helpful link for you to read in your spare time.
Re: Manning sentenced to 35 years
Posted: Fri Aug 23, 2013 11:43 pm
by rubato
I think the operating modern theory is that if you are confused enough about items basic to reality then you have to be let off.
Personally I think that every time this theory is advanced we should drag a random lawyer off the street and shoot them until it disappears.
Put natural selection to the benefit of humanity.
Yrs,
Rubato
Re: Manning sentenced to 35 years
Posted: Sat Aug 24, 2013 11:34 am
by Lord Jim
I don't have a problem with this sentence for The Traitor Manning,
provided that he actually serves it...(I've read that he could in fact be released in as little as seven years, which would of course be a grotesque travesty) I'm willing to see him paroled after 30 years since he finally, at long last, expressed some contrition for the crimes he committed against his country.
I'll bet it will do nothing with an Obama embarrassed by the information released (and, face it, that is the extent of the damage done here
That characterization is as inaccurate as inaccurate can be:
The sentencing hearing for Army Pfc. Bradley Manning is starting out with a look at the damage he caused by leaking troves of U.S. secrets to WikiLeaks.
Retired Army Brig. Gen. Robert Carr testified Wednesday the classified documents Manning disclosed through the website fractured U.S. military relationships with foreign governments and Afghan villagers.
Carr headed a Defense Department task force that assessed the fallout from the leaks. He says the material identified hundreds of Afghan villagers by name, causing some of them to stop helping U.S. forces.
It's the first time during the soldier's court-martial that testimony has been allowed about the actual damage the leaks caused. [The government spent eleven hours in closed testimony detailing the damage done to the US by The Traitor Manning]
The former intelligence analyst was convicted of 20 of 22 charges for sending hundreds of thousands of government and diplomatic secrets to WikiLeaks, but he was found not guilty of aiding the enemy, which alone could have meant life in prison without parole.
"We're not celebrating," defense attorney David Coombs said. "Ultimately, his sentence is all that really matters."
Military prosecutors said they would call as many as 20 witnesses for the sentencing phase. The government said as many as half of the prosecution witnesses would testify about classified matters in closed court. They include experts on counterintelligence, strategic planning and terrorism.
The judge prohibited both sides from presenting evidence during trial about any actual damage the leaks caused to national security and troops in Afghanistan and Iraq, but lawyers will be allowed to bring that up at sentencing.
http://www.newser.com/article/da7so1fo1 ... agers.html
State Department: Bradley Manning had ‘chilling effect’ on foreign relations
FORT MEADE, Maryland (Reuters) – U.S. soldier Bradley Manning’s leaks of classified government files had a “chilling effect” on foreign relations, impeding U.S. diplomats’ gathering of information, a senior State Department official said Monday.
“Every single embassy” was affected, said Undersecretary of State for Management Patrick Kennedy, who warned about long-term consequences of Manning’s 2010 leaks to the anti-secrecy website WikiLeaks.
The releases will have “a chilling effect that will go on for some time,” Kennedy said.
Kennedy testified at the sentencing hearing for Manning, who was convicted last week on criminal charges that included espionage. The hearing is to help the court martial determine how long the private first class should be in prison.
Kennedy was part of a panel that assessed the damage Manning caused to U.S. foreign relations by releasing more than 700,000 classified documents and videos.
The unauthorized releases made foreign diplomats, business leaders and other information sources “reticent to provide their full and frank opinions and share them with us,” he said, cutting off information that political leaders need to make foreign policy decisions.
At one point, then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton spoke out publicly in defense of her colleagues who sent the messages, which are known as diplomatic cables.
Attorneys for Manning quoted other U.S. government officials including former Defense Secretary Robert Gates downplaying any fallout from the releases.
UNAUTHORIZED RELEASE
Judge Colonel Denise Lind found Manning, 25, guilty on July 30 of 19 criminal counts related to the leaks, the largest unauthorized release of secret data in U.S. history. The files included more than 250,000 State Department cables.
http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2013/08/05/s ... relations/
Yes I know Big RR, those are just claims from people in the government, (you, know, the folks in a position to actually
know something about this) and if one takes the position that the government lies all the time about everything, and never says anything truthful, (which on occasion I've gotten the impression is position you take) it can be dismissed out of hand...(That's a very useful way of looking at things...to be able to make any assertion, and so long as it's only contradicted by authoritative sources to be able to to maintain that it hasn't been contradicted...I guess The Traitor Manning hasn't done any damage unless left wing conspiracy bloggers with no knowledge whatsoever say he has)
As for this bizarre idea that The Traitor Manning should be "pardoned"....
They must be licking toad at the ACLU to think that Barack Obama, (or
any President who took their oath of Office and responsibilities as Commander-In-Chief with even a minimal level of seriousness) would
ever consider "pardoning" someone who did what this guy did before he had spent decades in prison...
There's a better chance that Rubato is going to win
The Plan B Miss Congeniality Award than there is that this clown is going to receive a Presidential Pardon...
Re: Manning sentenced to 35 years
Posted: Sat Aug 24, 2013 12:08 pm
by Lord Jim
I see the verdict as a repudiation of the government's original position that the information leaked was highly confidential and put US troops or other individuals at risk. If you've seen statements of the court to the contrary, please post a link--I'd like to see them.
Ahh, I believe I can help you there...
I've spent a little time researching this, and frankly given the judge's "findings" in this case detailing the rationale for the conviction on the six violations of The Espionage Act, (She issued this at the request of the defense) I have a difficult time understanding why The Traitor Manning was able to skate on the aiding the enemy charge; (the language is very similar; it seems to me the judge split a very fine hair)
Here is the language of the statute The Traitor Manning was acquitted of violating:
10 USC § 904 - Art. 104. Aiding the enemy
Any person who—
(1) aids, or attempts to aid, the enemy with arms, ammunition, supplies, money, or other things; or
(2) without proper authority,
knowingly harbors or protects or gives intelligence to, or communicates or corresponds with or holds any intercourse with the enemy, either directly or indirectly;
shall suffer death or such other punishment as a court-martial or military commission may direct. This section does not apply to a military commission established under chapter 47A of this title.
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/10/904
I'm not going to post the entire relevant section of The Espionage Act under which The Traitor Manning was convicted, (it's quite lengthy; you can read the whole thing here:
http://codes.lp.findlaw.com/uscode/18/I/37/793 ) but here's the portion the judge cites in her finding:
Whoever, for the purpose of obtaining information respecting the national defense with intent or
reason to believe that the information is to be used to the injury of the United States, or to the advantage of any foreign nation -
See more at:
http://codes.lp.findlaw.com/uscode/18/I ... m7bcl.dpuf
Here's what the judge found in order to justify the Espionage Act convictions:
Judge explains Bradley Manning verdict
WASHINGTON (CNN) -
Col. Denise Lind, the Army judge who found Pfc. Bradley Manning guilty on 20 of 22 counts in the largest classified leak case in U.S. history explained her thinking, calling Manning's conduct "wrongful."
When Lind handed down her verdicts in July, Manning's lawyers asked her to issue her "special findings" for the guilty counts. That document was released Friday at Fort Meade, Maryland, where the sentencing phase of the trial continues.
One of the questions that both sides debated at length during the court-martial was whether by leaking material to WikiLeaks, Manning also was providing it to the enemy.
She ruled Manning had "knowledge that intelligence published on the Internet was accessible to al Qaeda."
The judge went on to say that "Manning's conduct was of a heedless nature that made it actually and imminently dangerous to others. His conduct was both wanton and reckless."
Lind said that Manning had "reason to believe the information could be used to the injury of the United States or to the advantage of any foreign nation."
Manning told the court Wednesday, in an unsworn statement, "I am sorry. I am sorry that my actions hurt people. I am sorry that it hurt the United States."
He went on to say, "Unfortunately, I can't go back and change things. I can only go forward. I want to go forward. Before I can do that, though, I understand that I must pay a price for my decisions and actions."
http://www.ksat.com/news/Judge-explains ... index.html
Given her finding for the Espionage Act convictions, I have a really hard time understanding the logic behind the Aiding The Enemy acquittal; (personally I feel the judge got that one wrong; it seems to me that based on the wording of the statute, the evidence that he was in violation of it was
overwhelming)
It appears that the judge was trying to draw some sort of distinction between the concept of "knowingly" and the concept of "reason to believe"....
Like I said, the splitting of a very thin hair...
Re: Manning sentenced to 35 years
Posted: Sat Aug 24, 2013 12:52 pm
by Daisy
Can I refer you back to this in terms of knowing the consequences of her actions.
Developing brain cells and structures can be malformed or have development interrupted by prenatal alcohol exposure; this can create an array of primary cognitive and functional disabilities (including poor memory, attention deficits, impulsive behavior, and poor cause-effect reasoning)
If Miss Manning appeals her sentence, based on psychological injuries caused in the womb. I have personal experience of two people with FAS and seriously, the decisions they make can be utterly mind boggling. She likely could only see the positive benefits of releasing the documents and videos not the damage it may cause.
Re: Manning sentenced to 35 years
Posted: Sat Aug 24, 2013 1:07 pm
by Lord Jim
I personally don't care if he's a she or she's a he, so long as whoever he/she is spends the next 30 years working out their gender identity issues as a guest of the government at Leavenworth....