Defense seeks merger of some Manning verdicts

[struggle4progress]

Source: Associated Press via The Spectrum

Jul. 31, 2013 10:47 AM

FORT MEADE, Maryland (AP) - ... The motions were revealed as the sentencing phase of Manning's court-martial began Wednesday at Fort Meade. The sentencing hearing is scheduled through Aug. 23.

The motions seek to merge two of the six espionage counts and two of the five theft counts of which Manning was convicted Tuesday. All of the counts involve Manning's leak of Afghanistan and Iraq battlefield reports.

If the judge agrees to merge the counts, it would mean Manning faces up to 116 years in prison instead of 136 years ...


Read more: http://www.thespectrum.com/usatoday/article/2602893

[Warren Stupidity]

1. Oh well only 116 years for revealing what we ought to know.

[FairWinds]

2. Obama made an extremely . .

prejudicial remark about the Manning case in 2011, that "He broke the law".
http://www.nbcnews.com/id/42770631/ns/us_news-security/t/did-obama-taint-wikileaks-suspects-right-fair-trial/
I sure hope the defense raised this issue during the trial -
does anyone know if they did?

[struggle4progress]

4. Remark was at a small private gathering, responding to a question. Were military personnel present?

[HardTimes99]

5. Widely reported = Undue command influence. So much for 'presumend innocent until

proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.' Presumption of innocence is so last century.

[struggle4progress]

9. The prohibition against "command influence" is intended to ensure a fair trial, by preventing

superiors in the chain-of-command from applying pressure or seeming to apply pressure that could be prejudicial to the defendant

Should this issue ever land in court, Manning would need to show that the recording shows an act by Mr Obama that creates a clear impression of an attempt to pressure his subordinates with respect to the Manning case

But the recording is alleged to be Mr Obama at a small private gathering, where no military personnel may have been present, and Mr Obama is responding to comments by or questions from Manning supporters there, in the course of which he merely expresses a frank opinion; the recording is largely unintelligible and doesn't actually seem to include Manning's name; and it's impossible to understand most of the recording, so the "proof" -- that the President was discussing Manning -- relies heavily on inconsistently reconstructed transcripts and the context provided by the Manning supporters who provided the recording

What actually happened here was rather odd: Manning supporters FIRST worked to publicize the largely unintelligible recording, together with various inconsistent transcripts and related context to support the claim that the President was discussing Manning -- and THEN asserted that the publicity they had sought was prejudicial to Manning

It's a mess of an argument, and I doubt Manning's counsel would be stupid enough to drag it into court

[burnodo]

8. not so private, apparently

[struggle4progress]

10. Was the public invited? Was the press invited?

[burnodo]

12. Did his words get out?

Unless, of course, you don't like the guy that recorded Mitt Romney's 47% remark

[struggle4progress]

13. Moving goalposts

[burnodo]

14. Oh, yeah, sure

Whatever

[struggle4progress]

15. See my #9

[Kelvin Mace]

3. Meanwhile

Cheney, Rumsfeld, Rice, Bush, Powell, et al, still at large.

[HardTimes99]

6. Still at large and still livin' large. Makes me sick to call myself

an American citizen these days.

[FairWinds]

7. Struggle . .

You jest. It was all over the news.
It's called "command interference", a well-established legal principle.
The trail was tainted.
Bradley is a hero, and I'm proud to be a member of Veterans for Peace, which strongly supports him.
Do you really think it ought to be classified for our government to lobby Haiti to keep their minimum wage low?
That's the sort of thing Manning leaked. Good on him.
I defy you to show me a single example of a Manning leak that damaged America.
The real criminals in DC, of course, leak classified info all the time - but it's OK when they do it.
NOT !!!

[struggle4progress]

11. See my #9

[blackspade]

16. The administration is getting the result that they wanted.

so I guess everything is just fine.....