Bradley Manning's Confinement Conditions Are 'Not Customary' - HuffPo

[WillyT]

Bradley Manning's Confinement Conditions Are 'Not Customary'
Daphne Eviatar - Senior Associate, Human Rights First’s Law and Security Program
Posted: December 23, 2010 12:21 PM

<snip>

This past May, PFC Bradley Manning, the 22-year-old Army intelligence analyst who allegedly boasted of leaking video and documents to WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange, was arrested. Originally held in Kuwait, in July he was transferred to a prison at the Quantico Marine Corps Base in Virginia. (Firedoglake has a helpful timeline of events here.http://firedoglake.com/bradley-manning-wikileaks-timeline/ )

According to Manning's military defense lawyer, David Coombs, Manning is being held in maximum custody, alone in a cell about six by 12 feet. He does not see any other inmates and has only minimal exchanges with guards, who wake him up at 5:00 a.m. daily and check on him every five minutes. Coombs writes: "PFC Manning is required to respond in some affirmative manner. At night, if the guards cannot see PFC Manning clearly, because he has a blanket over his head or is curled up towards the wall, they will wake him in order to ensure he is okay." According to Coombs, Manning eats all his meals in his cell, is not allowed to exercise in his cell (if he tries to do sit-ups the guards stop him) and is not allowed sheets or pillows to sleep with.

The military's explanation of these conditions is twofold. A Quantico prison spokesman told Agence France-Press that Manning is being held in "maximum custody" because he is considered a risk to national security. Manning is also said to be a threat to himself, given the serious trouble he's in. As a result, he's on "Prevention of Injury" watch, which accounts for the lack of sheets and pillows.

But his lawyer thinks that's a ruse. And indeed, it's hard to imagine why prison officials would treat someone who they worry is mentally disturbed by isolating him to the point that, as medical experts have documented, is likely to make him crazy.

<snip>

More: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/daphne-eviatar/bradley-mannings-confinem_b_800737.html

:kick:

[Fridays Child]

1. k/r

[hlthe2b]

10. Just curious FC

Who is that pictured in your post?

[Fridays Child]

38. That would be me.

:hi:

[hlthe2b]

39. Oh, nice!

I wish more folks would do that. Here's lookin at ya! :toast:

[Lost-in-FL]

2. Don't you know leaking embarrasing information about our military...

is bad for our public image?????//??///

[maryf]

3. K&R and here's a couple of links for you

an example is being set...the poor guy needs support :grr:

http:www.bradleymanning.org

See this other OP relegated to the dungeon???:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=125x304471

[Autumn]

40. Wait a minute, why was that post moved to

the dungeon? That's not right.

[maryf]

47. No, it's not right...

and there are some pretty ugly posts there too that aren't right...

[Rex]

4. He embarrassed the Establishment and now they are going to kill

him off, slowly and probably very painfully so that anyone thinking about giving out information again won't. It is called intimidation and the US govt is a master at it.

[maryf]

5. very Orwellian tactics...nt

[Rex]

7. Yes very Orwellian and I think that is the message meant to be sent out

and recieved...the Us govt won't just send you to the gas chamber, they will punish you mentally and physically first.

[maryf]

8. yep

as I said above an example is being set...We can't let it work...

[maryf]

50. right here by Hedges

"The psychological torture of Pvt. Bradley Manning—who has now been imprisoned for seven months without being convicted of any crime—mirrors the breaking of the dissident Winston Smith at the end of “1984.” Manning is being held as a “maximum custody detainee” in the brig at Marine Corps Base Quantico, in Virginia. He spends 23 of every 24 hours alone. He is denied exercise. He cannot have a pillow or sheets for his bed. Army doctors have been plying him with antidepressants. The cruder forms of torture of the Gestapo have been replaced with refined Orwellian techniques, largely developed by government psychologists, to turn dissidents like Manning into vegetables. We break souls as well as bodies. It is more effective. Now we can all be taken to Orwell’s dreaded Room 101 to become compliant and harmless. These “special administrative measures” are regularly imposed on our dissidents, including Syed Fahad Hashmi, who was imprisoned under similar conditions for three years before going to trial. The techniques have psychologically maimed thousands of detainees in our black sites around the globe. They are the staple form of control in our maximum security prisons where the corporate state makes war on our most politically astute underclass—African-Americans. It all presages the shift from Huxley to Orwell."

Catch it here in Marmar's post:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=103x578303

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

6. We must be protected from this horrible and dangerous criminal who threatens us with knowledge.

[soryang]

9. Er, what about speedy trial, Article 10?

Speedy trial rights in the military are more extensive than the Sixth Amendment, for reasons that are all too apparent in this article. It seems that Manning is already well inside the Barker inquiry period.

http://www.armfor.uscourts.gov/digest/VB3.htm

He detention apparently began on May 29. This is outrageous!

[Major Hogwash]

48. That's a very good point.

But, I think they have suspended some rulez of law ever since 2000 when the Supreme Court appointed Bush to be President.

[Ellipsis]

11. kick

[Dystopian]

12. KandR.

peace~

[Sheepshank]

13. So they explained his conditions....

....how about pointing out the specific ones that are 'not customary'? For instance they make a point out, up front, the size of the cell. Was one build specifically for Manning, or are they using one that is already there?

For the conditions that are 'not customary', is the treatment arbitrary or established practice for certain circumstances?

Enquiring minds would really like to know.

[EFerrari]

15. Under what circumstances can a suspect be punished before his trial?

[Sheepshank]

19. Wow,,,your 'snappy' comeback avoids the question.

Held for trail is a resort used where there is immediate compelling evidence that precludes bail. So you think EVERYONE who does not or cannot or is denied bail is in this same situation? Again, I have yet to see any compelling argument that he is being treated out of the norm.

[EFerrari]

22. No, you're misrepresenting my post.

The man is being held in solitary confinement in chains. Is that an acceptable pre-trial norm for a non-violent crime in your opinion?

[PBS Poll-435]

26. How do you know that is actually true?

Not believe, but actually know?

[EFerrari]

34. Which part? The Pentagram doesn't refute it.

They just said it wasn't abusive. :shrug:

[Ellipsis]

35. Your'e late to the game then... cuz there's been plenty. n/t

[WillyT]

16. Further Into The Piece...

At the very least, the conditions would seem to amount to a violation of Article 13 of the UCMJ, which states:

No person, while being held for trial, may be subjected to punishment or penalty other than arrest or confinement upon the charges pending against him, nor shall the arrest or confinement imposed upon him be any more rigorous than the circumstances required to insure his presence, but he may be subjected to minor punishment during that period for infractions of discipline.

And...

No one has claimed that Bradley Manning has been anything less than completely cooperative with prison guards. And given that he's not accused of a violent crime, it's difficult to see why such extreme security measures are necessary.

In a recent blog post Manning's lawyer writes that military case law would allow a judge to infer that the conditions of Manning's confinement amount to punishment. As he writes in this post, citing the relevant case law:

Article 13 provides that pretrial confinement should not be "more rigorous than the circumstances require to insure" the servicemember's presence at court. "Conditions that are sufficiently egregious may give rise to a permissive inference that an accused is being punished. . . ." United States v. King, 61 M.J. 225, 227-28 (C.A.A.F. 2005); see also United States v. Crawford, 62 M.J. 411 (C.A.A.F. 2006). Arbitrary or purposeless conditions also can be considered to raise an inference of punishment. King, 61 M.J. at 227-28 (citing United States v. James, 28 M.J. 214, 216 (C.M.A. 1989)).

:shrug:

[Sheepshank]

21. nice that you post certain articles...thanks

but they still don't offer any insight into the idea that Manning is being subjected to treatment more rigorous or "not customary" to others in the same situation present or past.

I'd read here where there were posters were incensed that visitors of Manning were subject to FBI scruitiny...yet failed to point out the same protocol being used for visitors of Major Nidal Malik Hasan, of the Ft Hood shooting fame. Again, where is there proof that Manning is subjected to 'non customary' treatment dis-similar (un-similar, non-similar...whatever) to others being held in military prison without bail.

[WillyT]

23. Woosh... Right Over Your Head...

"... where is there proof that Manning is subjected to more brutal cruel punishment outside of others being held in prison without bail."

They are not supposed to be subject to ANY punishment, cruel or otherwise, while they are being held awaiting trial. Unless, as said in the article, they've violated rules while in detention.

:shrug:

[PBS Poll-435]

25. What about no cable TV? What about Mac & Cheese for lunch?

What about 1-ply toilet paper?

What about showering with a group of men?




Where do YOU draw the line?

[Sheepshank]

32. Bull...while awaiting trial

there are plenty of people that shouldn't be walking free while their attorney's are establishing a possible defense.

To assume that those caught with a smoking gun should be allowed to walk free while attorneys get their defense and prosecuting cases together, and while the courts set a date is "whoosh" apparently way over your head.

[WillyT]

44. Teh Stupid... It Hurts...

:banghead:

[PBS Poll-435]

14. Boo Hoo

:cry:

[WillyT]

17. Americans Believe In The Concept Of...

Innocent, until proven guilty.

Why don't don't you?

:shrug:

[PBS Poll-435]

18. Of course I do

I just don't believe internet rumors about confinement.

[WillyT]

20. What About Internet Rumors Of Torture ???

Say... in the Bush Administration?

:shrug:

[PBS Poll-435]

24. This is so freaking sad

:(

The hero worship for somebody that confessed on tape on and paper to committing a breach.

It is just all so confusing.

[Name removed]

27. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[PBS Poll-435]

28. That is not what this or that is

And I am offended by your response.


When people confess to a crime they are put into brick buildings.


And seriously, believing anything from HuffPO is just basically the definition of insanity.

[WillyT]

29. They Have Not Accepted His Confession, Because There Has Been No Trial, And...

no Judgement.

So torturing him while he awaits trial, and destroying his mind, is the same thing we did to Jose Padilla, and is TOTALLY UnAmerican... or at least it USED TO BE!

:shrug:

[PBS Poll-435]

30. How do you know that he is being tortured?

Really?

[treestar]

31. They do not, and more interesting is that they feel they must

add this extra layer onto the drama. As if being held in any particular conditions would affect what he did. If one thinks that is a thing to be lauded, then it would still be equally laudable were he held in a country club.

It's like those drama junkies you talk to who not only have say a medical drama but a negligent doctor and a mean husband - it just all happens to go wrong on every level.

[Name removed]

41. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Sheepshank]

33. even more, buying anything from FireDogLake

is a tad questionable. Buying into standing innuendos, without questioning the basis for statements like "not customary" treatment, is simply too ambiguous to be believed.

"Not customary" treatment only means something if there is some proof that Manning's treatment is done outside of the norm. Where is the proof of that?

[WillyT]

43. And If You Had Bothered To Actually Read The OP, Let Alone The Linked Article...

You would have known that "Not Customary" came from an author at Huffington Post.

Nice cred there.

:banghead:

[Sheepshank]

52. Huff Po cites FDL...puts the whole article into question n/t

[maryf]

46. and when they come for you....nt

[mdmc]

36. ..

[TexasObserver]

37. More despicable conduct from the war party and its agents.

They worship fascism. They hate freedom. They hate civil liberties. They despise the constitution and work actively to avoid it.

[soryang]

42. There is a big difference between a USMC brig and Army brig

The fact they have him in a marine corps brig and they are holding him so long without trial indicates that it is punishment and it is meant to intimidate. They are trying to break him, that is exactly what marine corps brigs are used for.

[maryf]

45. Yep, break him and use him as an example...

egregious.

[maryf]

49. morning kick nt

[ryan_cats]

51. You do realize he's still in the military?

You do realize he's still in the military? He's complaining about getting up at 5:00am, what time did he get up when he was serving?

Is his attorney a military officer? I think the guy's a traitor but he does deserve fair representation. I have nothing against military attorneys but I would prefer him to have a civilian representative and a military attorney to assist his main attorney through the maze of military procedures.