Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

General Discussion

Recursion

(56,582 posts)

5. That's fair

Reply to 99th_Monkey (Reply #4)

Thu Jan 17, 2013, 08:00 PM

Jan 2013

I'm on my iPhone so it's not really easy to link; obviously, use your own judgement.

And as a caveat I'm not a fan of Manning. My fiancée wrote some of the cables he leaked.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

10 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Bradley Manning's prosecutor MUST prove he intended to "aid the enemy". [View all] 99th_Monkey Jan 2013 OP

Mens rea is a part of most crimes Recursion Jan 2013 #1

Please show me where in this article, or elsewhere, that "prosecution was asking for" this? 99th_Monkey Jan 2013 #2

Because this was a set of rulings Recursion Jan 2013 #3

Never-the-less, evidence of motive is a separate issue from needing to prove "aiding the enemy" 99th_Monkey Jan 2013 #4

That's fair Recursion Jan 2013 #5

Good to know 99th_Monkey Jan 2013 #6

Sorry. He can try to show he didn't know he was indirectly helping the enemy by DevonRex Jan 2013 #7

I have a feeling that Manning will walk madokie Jan 2013 #8

I'm afraid I agree Recursion Jan 2013 #10

It's a difficult case for the prosecutor, but winnable. agentS Jan 2013 #9