Bradley Manning Threatened His Stepmother With a Knife? It's good for his Defense.

[msanthrope]

I watched the Frontline special this morning, and I thought it was pretty good. I think it will be VERY helpful to his defense, since it shows him as a fairly troubled and aimless young kid who was an easy mark for the likes of Assange.

It points to a legal defense--really the only defense Manning has--that he should not have been in the Army, and should not have been given access to the documents that he leaked, and, should have been removed from duty.

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/wikileaks/bradley-manning/bradley-manning-911-call/

This, coupled with Manning's own attorney's statement about his mental state indicates to me that Coombs is going to try for "Hasan Akbar Redux" (explained below.)

From Coombs--

"There are reports your client is suicidal. Is this true?

A: The reports of those concerns are true.* PFC Manning's unit documented a steady decline in his mental stability from early on in their deployment starting around December of 2009 to May of 2010. Consistent in this documentation was the behavior that they were concerned about intensified during the deployment. Due to this behavior and a concern about his personal safety, the command made the decision to remove the bolt from PFC Manning's weapon. For several weeks, he apparently walked around Forward Operating Base Hammer with his assigned weapon that was incapable of being used. During this time, however, he was still expected to perform his duties as an intelligence analyst.

*To be abundantly clear, I am not saying that PFC Manning was suicidal, just that there are reports by his immediate supervisor that expressed the concern that he may be suicidal."

http://www.armycourtmartialdefense.info/2010/09/pfc-manning-lawyer-does-not-question.html



In 2005, Hasan Akbar's lawyers, including Coombs, went with the only defense their client really had--namely, that he was one unstable dude, and that the Army should have known that. Oh, and he had sleep apnea. His diary is available online--it's pretty sick.

Of course, Hasan Akbar is sitting on federal death row in Leavenworth.

I think Manning's defense will embrace his instability, and will include documentation of the problems he had before and in the Army. I think Coombs will also have to spin a scenario where Assange is the prime mover and shaker, and manipulator of Manning. All in all, I think Frontline helped Manning.

[frylock]

1. an easy mark for the likes of assange?

hunh?

[msanthrope]

2. Well, it's really the only defense he's got---

He was manipulated into thinking he was doing the right thing by stealing and leaking stuff. He was a patsy. It's a good defense, and might actually help him avoid the death penalty.

With the new specifications, I'm getting the feeling that Manning probably was told to find and steal certain things by wikileaks (see particularly, the specification 16 of the new charge sheet)--which would explain the most serious charges, IMHO, of aiding the enemy.

I don't see another defense for Manning--do you?

[walldude]

6. What makes you think Wiki sought out Manning?

And defense? He needs a defense for shining a light on illegal activity?

What I don't see a defense for is the things in the papers Manning leaked to Wiki. Torture? Murder? Rape? Shooting people who were trying to surrender?

Manning didn't leak any operational material. Nothing he leaked put anyone or any operation in danger. What he did was leak embarrassing information that makes the military and the government look like the assholes they are.


http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion/commentators/fisk/robert-fisk-the-shaming-of-america-2115111.html

[msanthrope]

10. How do you know Manning didn't leak any operational material? FYI--your source is dated.

You do realize that Mr. Fisk's opinion doesn't encompass the 22 new charges, correct?

How would you know what's in that material?

I call the global server addresses for the US Army in Iraq 'operational material,' but your mileage may vary.

As for who sought out whom, it's irrelevant to the prosecution, but may be necessary for a defense.

[azureblue]

3. except for one tiny detail

it has already been established that there was / is not contact between the two.

[msanthrope]

5. Really? 'Cause you think the military is truthful?

[frylock]

8. how would claiming there was no contact between assange and manning benefit the military?

[msanthrope]

9. Do you have a link to an actual military person who said that?

An actual person, who has looked at the evidence of the grand jury in the 3rd, and reviewed all the military evidence?

No--you don't have that.

All you have is an unamed military source who spoke to Jim Miklaszewski.*** (who has never carried Pentagon water, right?)

Now, read the money quote from NBC News--and note how many times the word 'direct' is used. And then read the Guardian commentary---

"The officials say that while investigators have determined that Manning had allegedly unlawfully downloaded tens of thousands of documents onto his own computer and passed them to an unauthorized person, there is apparently no evidence he passed the files directly to Assange, or had any direct contact with the controversial WikiLeaks figure."

"If accurate, then US authorities have no realistic chance of successfully prosecuting or extraditing Assange for the leak of thousands of classified documents."

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/richard-adams-blog/2011/jan/25/bradley-manning-julian-assange-wikileaks?CMP=twt_gu

A military source just happens to tell NBC news that they have no 'direct' link between Manning and Assange? Rather than take that report at face value, I suggest you look up the definition of 'false flag.' Ask yourself, 'cui bono?'

And ask yourself why the military, NBC News, and the Guardian failed to note this little fact: you don't need direct contact to prove federal conspiracy charges.

Now, what is the benefit to the military for planting a bullshit story like this???

It would cut off the defense of 'Julian made me do it.'

It cuts off the Assange anti-extradition defense of 'the United States is after me!'

And who knows what else....but when unamed military sources call up the NBC Pentagon correspondent with fairly precise language, you can bet there's dirty work afoot.

***Oh, yeah--that 'unamed military source' isn't going to be available for trial.

[frylock]

11. look up the defintion of false flag?!

i'm quite aware of false flag, limited hangout, modified LHO, etc. i merely asked a question, you're the one making the claims here. when did manning state that "julian made me do it?" has manning's attorney given any indication that they will use that defense?

moreover, not entirely certain where "false flag" falls into place here. is it your contention that the military "leaked" the info to manning? to what end? to snare assange?

[BrendaBrick]

4. Whatever the defense............

does not justify the way he is being treated!!!!!!!!

[raouldukelives]

7. Sadly he can't be treated as well as the "kill team"

But then his crime is much more serious than killing children because your bored.