One thing about the Manning verdict we all should be able to agree on

[cthulu2016]

Last edited Tue Jul 30, 2013, 09:08 PM - Edit history (2)

It is a good thing Manning was found not guilty of the charge of aiding the enemy since he lacked that intent, and intent is central to most serious crimes.

We have a few "strict liability" laws. Parking meters, for instance, don't care about your state of mind.

And we have some odd non-intent crimes like felony murder. You stick up a bank. A frightened customer dies of a heart attack. You are in serious trouble, even though you did not plan or intend to kill that person. And laws regarding recklessness where there is no intent.

And so on.

But aiding the enemy is not one of those crimes. It requires that you intend to aid the enemy... not merely an act with the effect of benefiting the enemy in some way, but somehow actively being on the wrong side.

If that intent could not be proved in this case then nobody should wish for a conviction on that particular charge.

[Peacetrain]

1. Yep.. it is a good thing..

That was a charge too far.. He definitely broke the law and his oath.. and there are consequences for that.. 700,000 files.. just downloaded.. there is no way he could have read all those and know exactly what he handed over to Wiki-leaks.. but aiding the enemy..no.. My guess is that he will end up with 20 years total.. this guy was not a spy.. not even an activist.. I hope they do not stick him with a life imprisonment.. that is also a punishment too far..

[cascadiance]

3. It was a good thing not only for Manning, but future whistleblowers and journalists too...

If that had stuck, then investigative journalism would be a "war zone" for everyone who tried it, and we truly would be instituting a police state in that case for the future. I think that might be a signal for many of us to leave this country if we value living in a democracy or even a system that isn't but is "fixable".

[cthulu2016]

4. Yes. (The espionage charges are chilling enough, in that dimension)

[woo me with science]

5. No reason to feel secure at all.

The administration is working relentlessly in the courts to cut off these avenues for exposing government abuse:

New interpretation of Espionage Act to cover leaks that are NOT Harmful To USA
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023365713

[cascadiance]

6. Yes, we still have a LOT to fear, but at least all the PTB aren't in lockstep with each other.. YET!

[MannyGoldstein]

2. Absolutely. Thanks for this! nm

[JNelson6563]

7. I am good with the verdict.

And your reasoning makes perfect sense. Agree completely.

I hope the sentence is reasonable.

Julie

[randome]

8. I can't say I really care about that particular aspect at all.

Prosecutors always go for maximum charges. It's sort of their 'thing'.

But I do believe Manning deserves some leniency simply because he was -is?- very mixed up emotionally, as evidenced by his punching his superior officer, releasing hundreds of thousands of classified documents of which he had no idea of the contents and his being found curled up on the floor after having carved the words 'I want' into a chair.

I'm all for leniency when someone is clearly emotionally disturbed despite their intent or lack of it.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]Don't ever underestimate the long-term effects of a good night's sleep.[/center][/font][hr]

[cthulu2016]

9. Prosecutors are not *supposed to* go for the max, but

only the max they can prove.

But, as you say, it is quite commonplace to overcharge. There are not sufficient punishments in place to prevent it.

[Bandit]

10. deleted bu author