So did Bradley Manning fall into a black hole over Christmas holidays?

[99th_Monkey]

So January 16th has come and gone, but I still haven't seen ANYthing about any findings
or rulings by this military judge fellow, Lt Col Paul Almanza; and no news re: Bradley Manning
since Dec.. So I decided to Google for any updates, and this one below is the most recent
article I could find. Anyone know anything other than what I've posted here by way of updates?

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/blog/2011/dec/22/bradley-manning-hearing-live-updates

Bradley Manning hearing – Thursday 22 December
• Closing prosecution and defence arguments at Fort Meade
• Thursday expected to be last day in Bradley Manning hearing
• Paul Almanza to make recommendation by 16 January
• Updating live from Fort Meade: Matt Williams
• In New York: Adam Gabbatt

Posted by
Matt Williams and Adam Gabbatt
Thursday 22 December 2011 14.01 EST
guardian.co.uk

9am: It's day seven in the Bradley Manning hearing, and it should be the last, writes Matt Williams. [snip]

9.15am: MW: I've just been told by the ever-present military lawyer – who has made the life of a lowly reporter wading through military jargon and legalese a lot easier over the last few days – that aside from the six days of testimony, the investigating officer has an additional 300,000 pages of evidence to wade through. [snip] Lt Col Paul Almanza is due to make his recommendation to the convening authority by 16 January, although he can push this date back if he is struggling. [snip]

11am: MW: Private Manning's defence challenged the investigating officer to deliver a "reality check" to the US army and government. In a 20 minute closing argument, civilian lawyer David Coombs lambasted the prosecution for trying to "strong-arm" a guilty plea from the suspected Wikileaks source by over charging him. "You are in a unique position to provide the US army with something it needs, a reality check," he opened his remarks with. [snip]

11.47am: MW: The hearing was concluded by Investigating officer Lt Col Paul Almanza who told Manning that his recommendation to the convening authority – which will ultimately rule if the soldier is to face a court martial – is not binding. Almanza now has until 16 January to inform that body of his opinion. Given the sheer bulk of evidence he has to wade through, it will mean that much of his Christmas break will be spent at his desk.

[jberryhill]

1. He reccommnded the case proceed to trial

[99th_Monkey]

2. Wonder why nothing like that came up on google?

You gotta link? .. if not, I'll poke around a little more.

[tammywammy]

3. ...

https://www.google.com/#q=bradley+manning&hl=en&prmd=imvnso&source=lnms&tbm=nws&ei=UGsnT935OIrE2QXUvNncAg&sa=X&oi=mode_link&ct=mode&cd=5&ved=0CBkQ_AUoBA&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.r_qf.,cf.osb&fp=1d5fed3da18fe349&biw=1366&bih=673

Officer recommends court-martial for Bradley Manning in WikiLeaks case
An Army investigating officer recommended Thursday that accused leaker Pfc. Bradley Manning face a court-martial for his alleged role in providing massive amounts of classified information to anti-secrecy group WikiLeaks.

The ruling came after a preliminary hearing last month in which prosecutors presented evidence appearing to link Manning with the security breach, including chat logs between him and WikiLeaks co-founder Julian Assange. Manning faces 22 counts, including aiding the enemy, and could face life in prison if convicted.

The investigating officer, Lt. Col. Paul Almanza, found that the charges presented at the preliminary hearing offered reasonable evidence that Manning had committed the offenses alleged. Manning, 24, worked as an intelligence analyst in Baghdad and was detained in May 2010 and charged that July.

Manning is accused of leaking hundreds of thousands of documents to WikiLeaks. They include State Department cables, daily field reports from the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, detainee assessments from Guantanamo Bay, and a 2007 Army video of an Apache helicopter firing on civilians.
-snip-

http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/officer-recommends-court-martial-for-bradley-manning-in-wikileaks-case/2012/01/12/gIQAqRvEuP_story.html

[99th_Monkey]

4. Hey thanks. Bummer it wasn't thrown out. ~nt

[PragmaticLiberal]

5. Out of curiosity, on what grounds do you think this case should be thrown out on?

You think he didn't do what he was accused of or is that you just agree with what he did?


Just curious....

[99th_Monkey]

8. Same reasons Ellsberg's case was dismissed

i.e. that Manning was only doing what he was sworn duty was, in revealing the war
crimes that his government was committing.

plus that Manning has been essentially tortured via isolation and extreme mistreatment,

plus that POTUS glibly announced that "Manning broke the law", thus making a fair trial
at this point impossible.

[jberryhill]

6. There was zero likelihood of that

[T S Justly]

7. Lost track. Thanks. K&R (nt)